N^ 


A 


BX  8030  .K68  S62  v. 2 
Spaeth,  Adolph,  1839-1910. 
Charles  Porterfield  Krauth 
Adolph  Spaeth 


x^' 


Charles  lp>orterfielb  IRrautb 


2).D.,  ILX.D. 


NORTON  PROFESSOR  OF  SYSTEMATIC  THEOLOGY  AND  CHURCH 
POLITY  IN  THE  LUTHERAN  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY  IN  PHILA- 
DELPHIA; PROFESSOR  OF  INTELLECTUAL  AND  MORAL  PHILOSO- 
PHY, AND  VICE-PROVOST  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  PENNSYLVANIA 


"  Faithful  to  the  Truth 
True  to  the  Faith." 


ADOLPH  SPAETH,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Professor  in  the  Lutheran    Theological  Seminary  in  Philadelphia. 


fii  a:wo  Wolumes 


i       JAN  18  1918 


c^ 


^SICAL  St"'V 


'.mv^ 


VoLU\fE   //.,  i8sg-i88s 


PHILADELPHIA 

General  Council  ipublication  "Sbouse 

1522  Arch  Street 
1909 


PREFACE. 

Special  acknowledgements  are  due  to  Professor 
Henry  E.  Jacobs,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  for  much  detailed 
information  and  for  constant  advice  in  the  prepara- 
tion of  this  volume. 

The  very  full  Index  covering  both  volumes  of 
the  Biography  is  the  work  of  Mrs.  Spaeth. 

The  plan  pursued  in  this  second  volume  is  essen- 
tially the  same  as  that  of  the  first,  viz. :  to  let  Dr. 
Krauth,  as  much  as  possible,  speak  for  himself. 
While  for  this  purpose  there  were  not  as  many  of 
his  letters  available  as  in  the  first  volume,  more 
extended  use  was  made  of  his  articles. 

Not  what  we,  who  knew  him  face  to  face,  may 
say  of  him,  will  be  of  permanent  value  to  the 
Church,  but  what  Dr.  Krauth  himself  thought  and 
spoke  on  the  great  questions  that  agitated  the 
Church  in  his  days,  and  will  continue  to  agitate 
her  for  some  time  to  come. 

This  Biography  was  written  for  the  future.  Dr. 
Krauth,  in  many  respects,  was  ahead  of  his  time. 
With  all  the  admiration  and  affection  he  gained 
among  his  contemporaries,  there  were  compara- 
tively few  English  Lutherans  ready  to  follow  him 
consistently  to  the  end,  through  all  his  arguments 
and  conclusions.    His  day  is  yet  to  come,  if  we  are 


vi  PREFACE. 

to  have  a  harmonious  Lutheranism  that  truly  repre- 
sents, in  doctrine  and  life,  the  Mother-Church  of 
the  Reformation  in  the  English  world-language. 

While  we  find  it  impossible  to  share  his  optimis- 
tic expectations  that  some  one  form  of  Christianity- 
is  to  be  the  conquering  religion  of  the  world,  and, 
lifting  itself  "above  the  tangled  mass  of  antagonis- 
tic communions,  will  ultimately  impose  order  on 
chaos,"  we  are  fully  convinced  that  the  truly  Cath- 
olic Protestantism  of  the  Conservative  Reforma- 
tion, that  is  Lutheranism,  has  its  greatest  mission 
yet  to  fulfill  in  this  Western  world,  and  if  it  is  to 
abide  and  to  do  the  work  assigned  to  it  in  the  prov- 
idence of  God,  it  must  be  on  the  lines  and  principles 
mapped  out  and  maintained  by  its  greatest  English- 
speaking  teacher  and  representative,  Dr.  Charles 

PORTERFIELD   KrAUTH. 

A.  S. 

Mount  Airy,  Philadelphia. 
March  17,  1909. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  X. 

PASTORATE  IN    ST.   MARK'S   CHURCH,    PHILADELPHIA. 

1859- 1861. 

Installation  at  St.  Mark's  Church,  i ;  constitutional  provisions,  i ; 
Dr.  D.  Gilbert's  letter,  2;  conflict  about  the  clerical  gown,  3;  Dis- 
courses on  Christian  Liberty,  5 ;  secession ;  St.  James'  English  Luth- 
eran Church,  12 ;  action  of  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania  con- 
cerning clerical  robes,  13;  sermon  by  Dr.  B.  Kurtz,  13;  Dr.  S.  S. 
Schmucker  on  "  The  Spiritual  Worship  of  God,"  14 ;  C.  P.  K.'s 
Reviews ;  A  Melanchthonian  Pronunciamento,  15 ;  Autocracy  of  the 
Tailor;  Sartor  Resartus,  18;  resignation  from  the  pastorate  of 
St.  Mark's,  23 ;  C.  P.  K.  in  the  East  Pennsylvania  Synod,  25 ;  Dr. 
C.  Hay's  motion  on  Ministerial  Sessions,  26 ;  attempts  to  re-unite 
the  East  Pennsylvania  Synod  with  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, 27;  C.  P.  K.  received  into  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania,  2^. 

CHAPTER  XI. 

EDITOR  OF  THE  LUTHERAN  AND  MISSIONARY. 

I 860- I 867. 

Previous  editorial  work,  28;  ihe  Lutheran  and  Home  Journal, 
28;  Apologv  for  our  Existence,  29;  the  Lutheran  Observer,  30; 
action  of  the  West  Pennsylvania  Synod  criticizing  the  Observer, 
32;  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  34;  Where  Do  We  Stand?  35; 
Editor  and  Preacher,  39;  The  Lutheran  Church  and  her  News- 
paper Literature,  42 ;  Church  Papers,  Individual  and  Official,  46 ; 
Difficulties  in  the  Way  of  The  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  48;  C.  P. 
K.'s  hopefulness,  50;  How  to  Make  a  Paper  Succeed,  54;  Divine 
Truth,  55  ;  C  P.  K.  resigns  from  the  editorship,  57. 

vii 


viii  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  XII. 

THE  NATIONAL  CRISIS. 

1860-1865. 

America  a  Blessing  to  Others,  59;  Virginia,  60;  Our  Country,  61; 
Politics  and  Religion,  66;  The  Union,  69;  The  First  Best  Thing  We 
Can  Do  for  Our  Country,  70;  The  National  Cemetery  at  Gettysburg, 
71;  Everett's  Oration,  71;  The  Monkey  in  the  Palm  Tree,  72;  The 
Two  Pageants ;  Tribute  to  Abraham  Lincoln,  73 ;  threatened  attack 
on  C.  P.  K.'s  home  after  the  President's  assassination,  73 ;  Another 
Victory  to  be  won,  74;  What  shall  we  do  with  them?  75. 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE    LITERARY    CONTROVERSY    AGAINST    AMERICAN 

LUTHERANISM. 

1861-1867. 

Defending  the  Defense,  77 ;  Combativeness  without  Destructive- 
ness,  78;  Forbearing  one  another  in  Love,  79;  He  that  is  not  against 
us,  is  on  our  part,  81 ;  Review  of  Dr.  E.  W.  Hutter's  Eulogy  of  Dr.  B. 
Kurtz,  82;  The  Insidious  Progress  of  Error  in  its  Three  Stages,  89; 
Rebuke  them  Sharply,  91;  Sauce  Piquante;  or  How  to  Enjoy  being 
Abused,  93 ;  Honesty  in  a  Name,  94 ;  The  General  Synod :  her  Name 
and  her  Founders,  96 ;  American  Lutheran  Church  vs.  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church  in  America,  104;  Fundamental  Doctrines,  112;  All 
Articles  of  Faith  are  Fundamental,  114;  Divine  Obligation  of  the 
Christian  Sabbath,  115;  Statement  of  the  Definite  Platform,  120; 
Luther's  Catechisms  and  the  Augsburg  Confession,  121  ;  Dr.  H.  E. 
Jacobs  on  the  Sabbath  Question,  123 ;  Dr.  C.  F.  Schaeffer's  position, 
123 ;  Lutheran  dogmaticians  on  the  Sunday  Question,  125. 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

THE  CRISIS  IN  THE  GENERAL  SYNOD. 

1864- 1867. 

General  Synod  Convention  in  York,  Pa.,  127 ;  the  Franckean  Synod 
applies  for  admission,  128;  first  vote  of  the  General  Synod,  129; 
The  Franckeans  admitted,  130 ;  protest  and  withdrawal  of  Pennsyl- 
vania Delegation,  131  ;  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the 
General   Synod,    132;    hopefulness  of   the   Ministerium   of    Pennsyl- 


CONTENTS.  ix 

vania,  134;  the  Amendment  rejected  by  four  Synods,  134;  Dr.  B. 
Kurtz  protests  against  it,  134;  The  Middle  Party  in  the  General 
Synod,  136;  establishment  of  the  Theological  Seminary  in  Phila- 
delphia, 139;  installation  of  the  first  Faculty,  T42;  C.  P.  K.'s  Address, 
143;  teaching  in  the  Seminary,  144;  controversy  with  Dr.  J.  A. 
Brown.  Philadelphia  vs.  Gettysburg,  146;  necessity  of  the  Semi- 
nary, 147;  effect  of  the  establishment  of  the  Seminary  on  the  leaders 
of  the  General  Synod,  152;  "The  Coming  Theological  Conflict" 
(S.  S.  Schmucker),  152;  significance  of  the  new  Seminary  for  the 
impending  crisis,  154;  Dr.  S.  Sprecher's  letter  foreshadowing  the 
decision  in  Fort  Wayne,  155;  Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker's  revelation,  156; 
Convention  at  Fort  Wayne,  157;  Dr.  S.  Sprecher's  sermon  reviewed 
by  C.  P.  K.,  157;  The  President's  ruling,  159;  Ministerium  of 
Pennsylvania  meets  at  Lancaster,  adopts  a  revised  Constitution, 
declares  its  connection  with  the  General  Synod  dissolved,  161 ; 
Fraternal  Address  issued  by  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania,  164; 
counter-address  by  the  Synods  of  West  Pennsylvania  and  East 
Pennsylvania,  167;  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh  leaves  the  General 
Synod,  169;  action  of  the  New  York  Ministerium,  169;  reconstruc- 
tion ;  Studies  in  Church  Polity ;  synodical  authority ;  the  representa- 
tive principle,  170;  criticism  of  the  Lutheraner,  171;  the  Reading 
Convention,  173;  Fundamental  Principles  of  Ecclesiastical  Power 
and  Church  Government,  174;  court  litigations  in  consequence  of 
the  disruption,  176;  domestic  affliction,  178;  letter  to  Thomas  H. 
Lane,  178;  pastoral  work  in  Philadelphia,  St.  Stephen's,  180;  Jubilee 
Service,  181 ;  Christmas  hymns,  182. 

CHAPTER  XV. 
THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL. 
1867- 1880. 
First  Convention,  Fort  Wayne,   Ind.,    183 ;   opening  sermon — The 
General   Council,   Its  Difficulties  and  Encouragements,    183 ;   Theses 
prepared  for  the  General  Council,  189 ;  declaration  against  Roman- 
ism,   189;    liturgical    work,    190;    Constitution    for    Congregations, 
The  Pastorate  and  The  Diaconate,  192;  Thetical  Statement  of  the 
Doctrine  concerning  the   Ministry   of  the  Gospel,    194;   The    Prin- 
ciples   of    Church    Fellowship,    195;    Pittsburgh    Convention,    198; 
Lancaster    Convention,    202 ;    Akron    Declaration,    204 ;    Galesburg 
Declaration,  205 ;  controversy  arising   from  Galesburg  Declaration, 
206 ;  first  article  on  the  Purity  of  the   Pulpit  and  the  Sanctity  of 
the  Altar,  209;  communications  from  Dr.   R.   Hill,  212;   Dr.   S.   L. 


X  CONTENTS. 

Harkey,  213;  Letter  from  Olympus,  215;  Bethlehem  Convention^ 
220;  Theses  on  the  Galesburg  Declaration,  222;  Twenty  Four  Pro- 
positions on  the  Galesburg  Declaration  by  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss,  222; 
correspondence  on  the  Galesburg  Declaration,  224;  letters  from 
Dr.  W.  A.  Passavant,  224;  letters  to  and  from  Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs, 
225 ;  Dr.  S.  Fritschel,  232 ;  from  and  to  Prof.  M.  Lx)y,  234 ;  to 
Rev.  C.  Spielman,  236 ;  from  and  to  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss,  237 ;  to  and 
from  Dr.  G.  F.  Krotel,  240;  Dr.  H.  I.  Schmidt,  242;  Philadelphia 
Convention,  Religion  and  Religionisms,  243;  letter  from  Dr.  J.  G. 
Morris,  Dr.  C.  W.  Schaeffer,  245 ;  Zanesville  Convention,  246 ;  Seal 
of  the  General  Council,  246. 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

PROFESSOR   OF   PHILOSOPHY   AND  VICE-PROVOST   OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  PENNSYLVANIA. 


History  of  the  University,  250 ;  Provost  Dr.  Chas  J.  Stille,  252 ;: 
administration  of  discipline,  253;  duties  of  Vice-Provost,  255;. 
Inauguration  of  Dr.  W.  Pepper,  257;  C.  P.  K.  among  the  students 
(Dr.  Geo.  S.  Fullerton),  259;  As  a  teacher  of  Philosophy  (Dr.  G> 
C.  F.  Haas),  267;  Fleming's  Vocabulary  of  Philosophical  Sciences,. 
268;  Dr.  Rob.  E.  Thompson's  estimate  of  Dr.  Krauth  as  a  Philo- 
sopher, 270 ;  Berkeley's  Principles,  270 ;  The  Strength  and  Weakness 
of  Idealism,  272;  Materialism,  277;  letter  from  Ulrici,  281;  letter 
from  Dr.  Phil.  Schaff,  281 ;  The  Library,  281 ;  Report  on  Bucknell 
Library,  282 ;  The  Library ;  what  it  is,  and  what  it  ought  to  be,  283 ; 
Krauth  Memorial  Library,  298. 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

LITERARY  ACTIVITY  DURING  THE  DECADE. 

1871-1881. 

Conservative  Reformation,  299;  original  plan  (letter  to  Thos.. 
H.  Lane),  299;  Criticisms  and  Reviews,  302;  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown, 
303;  Dr.  Caspar  Rene  Gregory,  304;  Dr.  C.  F.  Schaeffer,  304;  Dr, 
G.  F.  Krotel,  305;  Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs,  305;  Dr.  J.  W.  Nevin,  307; 
Dr.  C.  E.  Luthardt,  311;  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss,  312;  Dr.  Joel  Swartz, 
313;  Infant  Baptism  and  Infant  Salvation  in  the  Calvinistic  System, 
314;  letter  from  Dr.  Chas.  Hodge,  317;  opinion  of  the  American 
Church  Review,  317;  relations  to  Princeton,  319;  a  Lutheran  Review 
proposed  by  Dr.  R.  Hill,  322 ;  A  chronicle  of  the  Augsburg  Confes- 


CONTENTS.  xi 

sion,  324;  the  Predestination  Controversy,  326;  work  on  the  Bible 
Revision,  331;  Excellence  of  the  Authorized  Version,  3^2;  The 
Revised  Version,  335;  Book  Reviews,  337;  Just  Criticism,  338; 
Humor  and  Good  Humor,  338;  Plagiarism,  339;  Skeletons,  340; 
Religious  Light  Literature,  344 ;  Novel  Reading,  345 ;  Wit,  346 ; 
Jeremy  Taylor,  346;  Bulwer  and  Dickens,  347;  The  Scissors  and 
the  Paste-Pot,  348 ;  Dickens'  Letters,  349 ;  Miss  Mulock,  352 ;  Dr. 
McCosh,  353 ;  Sunday  School  Songs,  355 ;  Temperance  Jewels,  356. 

CHAPTER  XVHL 

JOURNEY  TO  EUROPE  AND  LUTHER-BIOGRAPHY. 

1880-1882. 

C.  P.  K.  requested  to  write  a  Luther-Biography,  361 ;  arrange- 
ments for  his  journey  to  Europe,  363;  Mr.  J.  W.  B.  Dobler,  363; 
letter  to  Dr.  A.  Spaeth,  364;  outline  of  journey,  365;  letters  from 
abroad,  368;  to  his  daughter,  368,  371;  to  Dr.  A.  Spaeth,  370; 
to  Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs,  375;  work  on  the  Luther-Biography,  377 ; 
lecture  in  Y.  M.  C.  A.  Hall  on  Luther  and  Luther's  Germany, 
377;  extracts  from  Luther-Biography,  Luther's  Germany,  378; 
Thueringia,  379. 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

THE  END. 

1881-1883. 

In  St.  Johannis  Church  and  parsonage,  382 ;  summer  excursions 
to  Canada  and  Mount  Desert,  383;  Cosmos  and  Microcosmos,  385; 
last  visits  to  University  and  Seminary,  394;  parting  from  John  K. 
Shryock,  394 ;  last  letter  from  Dr.  W.  A.  Passavant,  396 ;  death, 
.397;  funeral,  398. 

LIST  OF  PUBLICATIONS 401 

INDEX     409 


TENTH  CHAPTER. 

PASTORATE  IN   ST.   MARK's  CHURCH,   PHILADELPHIA. 
1859-1861. 

On  the  first  of  October,  1859,  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth  en- 
tered upon  his  work  as  pastor  of  St.  Mark's  EvangeHcal 
Lutheran  Church,  Spring  Garden  Street,  Philadelphia, 
but  not  until  March  2,2,  i860,  did  his  regular  installation 
take  place,  on  which  occasion  Drs.  C.  W.  Schaeffer,  E. 
W.  Hutter  and  J.  A.  Seiss  officiated.  About  ten  years 
before,  this  congregation  had  been  organized  (March 
26,  1850).  Its  first  pastor,  the  Rev.  Theophilus  Stork, 
D.  D.,  formerly  of  St.  Matthew's,  Philadelphia,  may 
properly  be  regarded  as  its  founder.  The  confessional 
standing  of  the  congregation  is  indicated  in  the  original 
constitution  by  the  following  references :  "  It  shall  be 
the  particular  duty  of  the  Church  Council  to  have  the 
congregation  always  supplied  with  an  Evangelical  Luth- 
eran minister,  sound  in  doctrine  and  of  a  fair  character 
that  the  Scriptures  be  expounded  and  the  doc- 
trines of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  preached  in 
their  purity,  that  the  service  of  God's  house  be  performed 
according  to  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel,  and  that  the 
sacraments  be  duly  and  regularly  administered."  "  No 
minister  of  the  Gospel  shall  ever  be  elected  as  pastor  of 
this  church,  unless  he  is  in  full  communion  with  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  agreeably  to  the  tenets, 
rites  and  ceremonies  thereof."  In  a  letter  addressed  by 
Dr.  D.  Gilbert,  of  Philadelphia,  to  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth,  on 
the  day  after  his  election,  he  describes  the  condition  of 
the  congregation  as  follows: 

I 


2  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.       [Chap.  X. 

It  is  well  known  that  this  congregation  is  composed 
of  a  variety  of  material.  Some  leaning  to  Methodism, 
others  "  Storkites,"  some  anything  at  all,  and  a  number 
of  staunch  Lutherans.     These  could  not  unite  on  any 

other  than  yourself The  Methodist  party  had 

managed  to  get  a  majority  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  to 
agree  to  ask  the  Rev.  Mr.  Cookman,  a  young  Methodist 
local  preacher  whether  he  would  agree  to  unite  himself 
with  the  Lutheran  Synod  provided  they  would  elect  him 
pastor.  This  he  promptly  declined.  In  this  unsettled 
state  of  affairs  of  the  congregation  several  have  with- 
drawn and,  for  the  present,  go  to  other  churches,  Epis- 
copal, Presbyterian,  etc.  No  doubt,  most,  if  not  all, 
will  return  should  you  accept,  and  if  they  do  not,  there  is 
abundance  of  material  at  hand  to  fill  up  any  vacancies 
that  may  exist.  In  the  event  of  your  declination  I  really 
do  not  know  what  is  to  become  of  the  congregation. 
The  rebellant  and  centrifugal  elements  will  all  again  be 
put  in  motion,  and  there  is  no  telling  the  result.  Should 
you  accept  however, — in  my  humble  opinion  it  will 
become  a  united  and  vigorous  church.  To  Lutheranize 
this  church  will  be  an  important  work  in  itself.  This 
latter  has  been  too  much  neglected,  especially  in  this 
congregation.  Of  course,  they  must  be  Christians  first, 
and  then,  however,  they  ought  to  be  indoctrinated  with 
the  views  of  our  glorious  Church  and  observe  all  her 
practices.  I  am  glad  that  I  am  able  to  say  that  it  is  the 
universal  wish  of  all  the  Lutheran  churches,  here,  English 
and  German,  that  you  should  come  to  Philadelphia.  .  .  . 
Since  Mr.  Seiss  has  been  with  us  St.  John's  has  filled  up 
and  is  now  overflowing.  The  Board  of  Trustees  will 
commence  another  church  to  be  located  West  of  Broad 
Street,  as  a  colony  from  St.  John's,  within  the  present 
year.  Should  you  become  the  pastor  of  St.  Mark's  I 
have  little  doubt  but  that  you  will  be  able  to  do  the  same 
in  an  equally  short  time.  The  increase  will  come  mainly 
from  our  German  congregations,  their  young  people 
who  become  English,  and  who  have  hitherto  furnished 


i8s9-6i.]  ST.  MARK'S  CHURCH.  3 

material  for  a  new  Episcopal  congregation  in  about  every 
three  years ! !  The  Germans,  pastors  and  people,  looked 
upon  St.  Matthew's  and  St.  Mark's  as  pseudo-Lutheran, 
and  hence  other  communions  received  the  young  people 

from  the   German   Churches Look  then   at  the 

change  that  will  be  effected  by  your  coming,  in  the 
relation  between  the  German  and  English  churches,  and 
then  at  the  results  to  our  beloved  Lutheran  Zion  in 
Philadelphia. 

It  was  to  be  expected  that  a  pastor  of  Dr.  Krauth's 
theological  convictions  would,  sooner  or  later,  find  him- 
self involved  in  a  conflict  with  those  members  of  the 
congregation  who  were  "reared  in  other  spiritual  homes," 
and,  very  naturally,  were  strangers  to  the  spirit  and  life 
of  the  Church  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  It  may  be 
regretted  that  the  occasion  for  the  actual  collision  was 
such  a  small  matter  as  the  question  of  the  right  of  the 
pastor  to  wear  the  clerical  gown  in  the  public  service. 
The  pastor's  own  father.  Dr.  Charles  Philip  Krauth, 
of  Gettysburg,  expressed  his  anxiety  that  it  might  become 
"a  war  about  forms  instead  of  one  about  doctrines." 
But  the  spirit  in  which  the  pastor  of  St.  Mark's  took  up 
and  treated  the  point  of  dispute  at  once  lifted  it  above 
a  mere  question  of  form.  Straightway  he  set  forth  the 
great  principle  of  Christian  Liberty  that  was  at  stake, 
and  upheld  it  with  all  the  acumen  and  depth  of  the 
profound  theologian,  and,  at  the  same  time,  with  all  the 
gentleness  and  forbearance  of  the  loving  pastor. 

The  history  of  the  controversy  itself  is  briefly  told. 
On  March  14,  i860,  at  a  special  meeting  of  the  Church 
Council,  called  at  the  request  of  the  pastor.  Dr.  Krauth 
asked  for  an  expression  of  their  opinion  and  vote  upon 
the  propriety  of  his  adopting  and  wearing  the  gown  as 
worn  by  most  of  the  Lutheran  clergymen.  He  stated 
his  views  at  length,  leaving  it  entirely  to  the  Board  to 


4         CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.      I  Chap.  X. 

decide,  as  he  had  no  preference  in  the  matter.  On  motion 
of  Mr.  Matlack  it  was  resolved  that  the  gown  be  adopted 
by  the  pastor  as  part  of  the  Church  service.  The  motion 
ehcited  remarks  from  all  the  members  present,  mostly  in 
its  favor.  When  the  votes  were  recorded  it  was  found 
that  Mr.  Murphy's  was  the  only  No.  Some  of  the 
members  of  St.  Mark's  opposed  to  this  decision  demanded 
a  congregational  meeting  to  consider  and  decide  the 
question.  They  were  invited  to  meet  with  the  Church 
Council,  on  May  15,  i860,  when  the  matter  was  fully 
discussed  with  them,  and  the  Council  declined  to  lay  it 
before  the  congregational  meeting.     Dr.  Krauth  held : 

That  this  was  a  Church  question  and  not  a  congre- 
gational one,  and  therefore,  to  be  settled  by  the  Church 
and  not  by  the  congregation.  If  the  Church  had  not 
settled  it,  it  would  be  a  question  for  the  minister,  and  not 
for  the  congregation.  He  is  appointed  to  conduct  the 
public  service,  and  in  all  points  left  open  by  the  Church, 
he  has  the  right  to  do  as  he  deems  best.  The  pastor  had 
made  himself  acquainted  privately,  to  a  large  extent, 
with  the  views  of  the  members,  and  was  satisfied  that 
they,  very  generally,  either  strongly  desired,  or  at  least 
did  not  strongly  oppose  the  return  to  church  usage.  He 
did  not  introduce  the  question  into  St.  Mark's,  but  found 
it  there,  and  learned  that  it  had  been  a  topic  of  interest 
for  years,  and  saw  reason  for  desiring  to  have  it  settled 
definitely,  in  some  way.  He  laid  it  before  the  Council, 
and  while  he  claimed  the  right  to  have  decided  it  without 
consultation,  committed  it  entirely  to  them.  The  Council, 
freely  chosen  by  the  congregation,  for  the  very  purpose, 
among  others,  of  giving  counsel  to  the  pastor,  and  of 
helping  him  to  see  the  wants  and  wishes  of  the  people, 
requested  him  to  conform  to  the  usage.  This  request 
was,  on  all  principles  of  sound  government,  the  request 
of  the  congregation,  officially  represented  in  its  officers. 
The    congregation    has    been    consulted    through    their 


1859-61.]  CHRISTIAN  LIBERTY.  5 

constitutional   organ,    and   it   is   at   the   request   of   the 
congregation,  I  conform  to  the  usages  of  our  Church. 

This  position  had  been  fully  explained  and  defined  to 
the  congregation  in  two  discourses  preached  on  March 
25,  i860,  and  afterwards  published. 

Christian  Liberty  in  its  relation  to  the  usages  of  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church.  The  substance  of  two 
sermons  delivered  in  St.  Mark's  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church,  Philadelphia,  Sunday,  March  2^th,  i860.  By 
Chas.  P.  Krauth,  D.D.  {Published  by  request.)  Phila- 
delphia, Henry  B.  Ashmead.  1102  &  1104  Sansom 
Street.     22  Pages. 

The  themes  of  the  two  discourses  are:  i.  Christian 
Liberty  Maintained,  based  on  II  Cor.  iii.  17.  Where  the 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  is,  there  is  liberty.  2.  Christian 
Liberty  Defended,  based  on  I  Cor.  iv.  5.  Judge  nothing 
before  the  time.  In  the  first  discourse  the  fundamental 
proposition  is  laid  down : 

Whatever  does  not  pertain  to  the  essence  of  religion, 
to  its  necessary  manifestations  and  its  necessary  means, 
is  subject  to  the  liberty  of  the  Church.  This  proposition, 
not  the  wearing  of  a  gown  in  itself,  is  to  be  considered. 
.  .  .  It  is  a  precious  gift  purchased  with  the  blood  of 
the  crucified  Christ  which  I  defend,  the  gift  of  Evangeli- 
cal freedom, — the  inalienable  right  of  the  Church  to 
remain  free  where  her  Lord  has  made  her  free. 

Now  there  must  be  some  principles  by  which  Christian 
liberty  regulates  itself,  so  that  the  freedom  of  the 
individual  does  not  take  from  the  congregation  what 
belongs  to  its  freedom  as  a  whole,  nor  the  freedom  of 
the  congregation  take  from  the  Church  what  belongs  to 
its  freedom  as  a  whole. 

The  liberty  of  the  Christian  individual  in  regard  to 
matters  of  order,  which  involve  himself  only,  is 
unlimited.  But  he  dare  not  go  out  of  his  sphere  to  make 
his  liberty  a  law  to  others, — to  prescribe  that  they  in 


6  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.       [Chap.  X. 

their  homes  shall  do  things  in  his  way.  He  is  not  to 
assume  what  belongs  to  the  congregation  as  a  whole. 
The  liberty  of  determining  points  of  order  which  affect 
the  whole  Church  belongs  not  to  the  congregation,  but 
to  the  Church  as  a  whole.  There  can  be  no  uniformity 
unless  the  same  authority  gives  the  rule  to  all.  If  every 
congregation  settles  these  matters  for  itself,  there  will  be 
as  many  varieties  as  there  are  congregations.  .  .  , 
Must  a  Lutheran  clergyman  learn  a  new  set  of  usages 
every  time  he  makes  a  change?  and  shall  we  never  have 
clustering  around  the  service  of  our  Church  the  potent 
charm  connected  with  the  growth  of  our  habits  in  it,  the 
feeling,  that,  go  whither  we  will,  we  shall  find  it  the 
same? 

When  our  forefathers  planted  the  Lutheran  Church 
in  this  country,  when  in  this  land,  which  was  then  almost 
a  wilderness,  they  gathered  together  congregations,  they 
did  not  consult  them,  nor  did  the  congregations  dream 
of  being  consulted,  whether  they  would  retain  the  usages 
of  our  Church.  Those  usages  were  established  on  the 
one  side  and  received  on  the  other  as  a  matter  of  course. 
And  though  their  acts  are  not  always  perfectly  consistent 
with  it,  this  principle  is  recognized  to  this  hour  in  all  of 
our  Lutheran  congregations. 

The  patriarchs  of  our  Church  in  this  country, — spir- 
itual, self-sacrificing  men  as  they  were, — continued  this 
usage  of  our  Church  (the  wearing  of  the  gown).  When 
they  were  taken  away,  when  the  low  state  of  religion, 
which  followed  the  war  of  our  independence,  infected  our 
Church  in  common  with  others;  when  the  taint  of  ration- 
alism reached  her  from  Europe,  and  she  grew  careless 
of  her  doctrine,  then  a  decline  in  her  love  of  her  venerable 
usages  took  place,  and  from  indifference  and  accident, 
from  the  excessive  size  of  her  pastoral  districts  and  from 
the  usages  of  the  sects  around  her,  much  was  suffered 
to  fall  away  to  which  she  ought  to  have  clung.  In  the 
period  antecedent  to  the  formation  of  our  General 
Synod,  there  was  a  deadness  in  our  Church,  an  indiffer- 
ence not  only  to  the  doctrines  which  distinguish  her  from 


i859-6i.]        LAXITY  IN  DOCTRINE  AND  USAGE.  7 

Other  Churches,  but  to  those  great  and  vital  doctrines 
which  are  dear  to  true  Christians  of  every  name.  It 
was  in  this  sad  period  of  dechne  from  her  first  love, 
that  the  neglect  of  her  usages  took  root.  The  tendency 
to  a  false  Congregationalism,  which  has  so  injured  our 
Church,  arose  at  this  period,  and  originated  in  the  fear 
of  all  general  authority  which  might  have  the  ability  to 
control  the  laxity  in  doctrine  and  in  Christian  life,  which 
so  widely  prevailed.  When  God  raised  up  the  new 
generation,  who  labored  in  reviving  the  life  of  the 
Church,  this  diversity  already  prevailed.  The  first 
labors  of  the  men  of  God,  who  felt  the  sore  need  of  the 
Church,  were  directed  to  the  revival  of  the  great  central 
truths  of  Evangelical  Christianity.  .  .  .  They 
attended  first  to  what  was  most  pressing;  and  in  those 
days  in  which  they  fought  against  the  spirit  of  sloth  in 
the  Church  with  the  one  hand,  and  worked  on  the  wall 
of  Zion  with  the  other,  they  perhaps  hardly  had  time  to 
think  of  the  importance  of  restoring  the  outward  grace 
of  the  Church  with  the  restoration  of  her  inner  life.  It 
is  a  lesson  rich  in  suggestion  that  just  that  period  in  the 
history  of  our  Church  in  this  country  in  which  the  form- 
alism of  heart  was  most  absolute,  and  the  Church  most 
lifeless,  was  the  one  in  which  her  venerable  forms  were 
abandoned.  It  is  a  sad  thing  to  see  the  form  robbed  of 
the  power;  but  there  is  one  stage  of  misery  below  this. 
It  is  reached  when  the  Church  becomes  so  careless,  so 
indolent,  that  she  does  not  even  keep  up  the  form.  And 
this  was  the  condition  of  a  large  part  of  our  Church. 
The  power  had  vanished  and  the  form  went  with  it. 
We  take  this  position  and  defy  contradiction,  that  the 
abandonment  of  her  ancient  usages  by  our  Church  in  this 
country  originated  in  her  deadness,  and  not  in  her 
spirituality.     .     .     . 

Our  General  Synod  did  not  originate  this  diversity; 
and  wherever  she  has  touched  it  at  all,  it  has  been  in  the 
effort  to  relieve  it.  One  grand  object  of  our  General 
Synod  was,  indeed,  to  put  a  check  upon  the  excessive 
freedom    of    congregations    and    Synods, — a    freedom 


8  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.      [Chap.  X. 

which  threatened  utterly  to  destroy  the  unity  of  the 
Church.  Though  the  excessive  jealousy  of  general 
authority,  which  arose  from  the  laxity  of  the  Church, 
compelled  the  General  Synod  in  its  constitution,  to  dis- 
avow the  power  of  prescribing  among  us  uniform  cere- 
monies of  religion  for  every  part  of  the  Church;  yet 
under  the  limitations  of  its  constitution  it  has  constantly 
labored  by  its  advice  to  do  what  it  is  not  allowed  to  do  by 
prescription. 

In  this  City  (Philadelphia)  all  our  prominent  German 
churches  have  retained  the  usage  (of  the  gown)  ;  the  first 
English  Lutheran  Church  retained  it.  The  diversity 
began  with  St.  Matthew's,  not  from  opposition  to  the 
usage,  but  from  circumstances  purely  accidental ;  and 
even  in  that  church,  one  of  the  pastors,  with  his  right 
unchallenged,  wore  the  gown ;  so  that  up  to  this  period 
St.  Mark's  is  the  only  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  of 
this  City  in  which  the  gown  has  never  been  worn. 

Finally,  we  maintain  that  this  usage,  which  our  Church 
has  thus  determined,  and  to  which  we  conform,  is  right. 
It  is  a  divine  thought,  whose  traces  we  meet  everywhere, 
that  all  things  shall  clothe  themselves  in  forms  that  indi- 
cate their  nature.  A  thought  prompted  by  the  tenderness 
of  God  puts  on  its  apparel  in  the  violet  and  His  majesty 
reveals  itself  in  what  the  Bible  calls  "Cedars  of  God." 
Through  all  the  kingdoms  of  nature,  animate  and  inani- 
mate, through  earth,  sea  and  sky,  the  thought  of  God 
which  lies  in  things  reveals  itself  in  their  outward  garb. 
The  whole  universe  of  matter  is  the  clothing  of  divine 
thought.  In  it  God  shows  what  He  is,  by  selecting  the 
appropriate  apparelling  of  His  attributes:  "For  the 
invisible  things  of  Him  from  the  creation  of  the  world, 
are  clearly  seen,  being  understood  by  the  things  that  are 
made."  All  matter  is  designed  to  serve  mind,  or  to 
display  its  attributes.  The  ultimate  reason  of  all  things 
visible  is  found  in  spirit.  Essence  and  revelation,  being 
and  clothing  are  the  two  ideas  of  the  entire  creation. 

All  feel  that  qualities  of  the  soul  may  be  revealed  in 
dress;  that  it  may  display  modesty  and  other  virtues,  or 


i859-6i.]  THE  GOWN  EXCLUSIVELY  PROTESTANT.  9 

impurity  and  other  vices,  and  may  prove  the  wearer  to 
be  refined  or  coarse.  All  feel  that  one  style  of  dress  is 
appropriate  to  childhood,another  to  youth,  another  to  old 
age.  .  .  .  The  dress  of  our  joyous  life  is  laid  off  in 
times  of  mourning  and  we  array  ourselves  in  the  garb 
of  sorrow.  Almost  parallel  with  this  general  feeling, 
and,  indeed,  as  a  necessary  result  of  it,  it  has  been  the 
sense  of  all  our  race,  that  sacred  offices  should  be  marked 
in  the  dress.  It  is  the  common  feature  of  all  religions. 
When  the  glorious  reformation  occurred,  all  the  churches 
which  arose  acknowledged  the  principle,  even  the 
Puritans  never  objected  to  the  simple  gown  and  bands 
but  wore  them.     ... 

What  is  this  apparel  in  which  such  offense  is  found? 
Not  a  gorgeous  robe  of  scarlet,  but  a  vestment  of  black; 
it  is  not  one  which  bears  the  tracery  of  superstitious 
emblems,  but  is  entirely  plain;  not  Romish,  even  in  the 
sense  of  being  used  as  an  official  dress  in  the  services  of 
that  church.  It  is  Protestant  and  exclusively  Protestant. 
No  Romish  priest  wears  or  dares  to  wear  it.  Where  its 
use  is  established  it  marks  the  Protestant  minister  and 
separates  him  from  the  priesthood  of  Rome.  It  is  an 
apparel  appropriate  to  the  office,  person,  the  place  with 
which  it  is  associated.  It  helps  to  keep  distinct  the  char- 
acter of  the  minister  as  a  teacher  of  God's  truth,  to 
remind  him  that  he  stands  before  men,  not  to  instruct 
them  in  politics  or  in  business,  not  to  display  his  elo- 
quence, or  learning,  but  in  God's  name  to  proclaim  the 
Gospel  of  peace.  ...  It  helps  to  merge  the  man 
in  the  servant  of  God  and  ambassador  of  Christ.  As 
far  as  its  influence  goes,  it  helps  to  correct  an  evil 
tendency  of  our  time — the  tendency  to  prize  the  minister 
-more  than  the  ministry, — the  voice  more  than  the  Word. 
It  helps  to  throw  the  man  into  the  background,  and  bring 
the  office  and  the  work  into  relief. 

In  the  second  discourse  the  objections  to  the  use 
of  the  gown  were  taken  up  and  considered:  i.  That 
.there  was  no  express  command  of  the  Lord   for  such 


lO  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.       [Chap.  X. 

usage.  2.  That  it  was  opposed  to  the  spirituality  of  the 
New  Testament  dispensation.  3.  That  it  was  not  in 
keeping  with  the  New  Testament  spirit  of  perfect  sim- 
pHcity  in  worship.  4.  That  it  was  in  conflict  with  the 
law  of  love,  because  offensive  to  some  of  the  brethren. 
(I  Cor.  viii.  13.)  5.  That  the  matter  ought  to  have  been 
laid  before  the  congregation  for  final  decision.  All  these 
objections  were  answered  in  the  same  calm,  patient, 
loving  and  dignified  manner,  which  pervades  both  these 
discourses  from  beginning  to  end. 

On  the  peculiar  character  of  St.  Mark's  congregation 
he  speaks  as  follows : 

If  it  be  suggested,  that  St.  Mark's  presents  an  excep- 
tional case,  because  it  is  so  largely  made  up  of  Christians 
whose  religious  training  occurred  in  other  denominations 
and  who,  therefore,  ought  not  to  be  expected  to  conform 
to  the  usages  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  we  reply,  that  this 
fact,  so  far  from  weakening  the  force  of  our  argument, 
imparts  to  it  great  additional  strength.  For  just  to  the 
extent  to  which  the  preferences  are  manifold  and  con- 
flicting does  it  become  difficult  to  meet  the  wishes  of  all. 
But  if  you  have  respect  to  one  set  of  wishes,  you  are 
bound  to  have  equal  respect  to  all ;  and  as  this  is  impossi- 
ble, nothing  remains  for  the  Church  but  calmly  to  carry 
out  her  own  proper  usages.  All  her  children  are  then 
put  upon  the  same  common  ground.  She  no  longer  is 
guided  by  preferences  but  by  principle,  and  no  one  has 
the  right  to  be  offended. 

Our  congregation  indeed  embraces  many  elements. 
This  Church  was  one  of  the  earliest  to  occupy  this  part 
of  the  City;  and  the  faithful  labors  of  the  first  pastor, — 
(Rev.  Theophilus  Stork) — drew  into  it  many  who  were 
reared  in  other  spiritual  homes,  but  who  have  proved 
themselves  devoted  members  of  our  household  of  faith. 
Yet  whatever  they  have  done  for  St.  Mark's,  they  will 
confess  that  the  ordinances  and  privileges  of  the  Gospel 
they  have  here  enjoyed  have  more  than  repaid  them. 


1859-01.]         THE  CHURCH  AND  ITS  MEMBERS.  u 

No  church-member  can  lay  up  a  balance  of  obligation 
against  his  church.  He  never  can  do  as  much  for  the 
church  as  it  does  for  him.  No  man  has  a  right  to  thrust 
upon  a  church  his  claim  upon  its  gratitude,  as  a  reason 
for  its  departure  from  its  principles,  or  as  a  ground  on 
which  it  may  be  urged  not  to  return  to  its  usages.  We 
belong  to  the  Church,  it  does  not  belong  to  us.     .     .     . 

The  discourse  closes  with  this  touching  appeal  which 
betrays  how  deeply  the  pastor  had  been  personally 
affected  by  this  conflict : 

It  may  be  that  some  whom  for  the  respect  and  love  I 
bear  them,  I  have  wished  most  to  hear  this  defense  of 
Christian  freedom,  have  not  been  willing  to  hear  it,  and 
are  not  in  this  audience.  Surely  Christian  men  ought 
to  be  willing  to  give  to  a  pastor  the  poor  privilege  the  law 
of  the  land  accords  to  the  vilest  criminal,  the  privilege 
of  being  heard  before  he  is  condemned.  To  judge  before 
we  hear  is  surely  to  judge  before  the  time.  But  what- 
ever may  be  the  amount  of  their  prejudice  against  the 
usage  of  our  Church  though  it  lead  them  to  transfer  to 
my  person  the  aversion  they  feel  to  my  opinions ;  though 
they  may  say  and  do  what  wounds  my  heart  deeply ;  they 
shall  see,  if  they  permit  me  to  show  it  to  them,  that  the 
heart  of  a  true  Christian  love  lies  too  deep,  and  throbs 
too  warmly,  to  be  chilled  by  that  which  touches  but  the 
outer  man.  If  their  love  for  one  whose  only  desire  is  to 
bless  them,  be  not  intense  enough  to  reach  him  through  a 
fold  of  silk,  may  he  have  grace  to  prove  that  his  love 
for  them  is  not  obstructed  in  its  beaming  forth,  by  so  thin 
a  veil.  When  the  years  have  fled ;  when  the  solemn 
hours  draw  nigh,  in  which  the  passions  of  earth  grow 
cold,  the  hour  in  which  dying  men  review  their  lives,  in 
the  light  of  that  awful  world  on  which  they  are  about  to 
enter ;  it  may  seem  to  those  who  have  thought  and  spoken 
most  harshly,  that  they  forgot  the  law  of  love  to  their 
pastor  and  they  may  feel  that  they  could  die  more  peace- 
fully if  he  could  tell  them  of  his  forgiveness.  But  he 
may  be  far  from  them;  or,  after  this  fitful  fever  of  life, 
may  be  sleeping  in  the  grave;  and  therefore,  could  he 
reach  their  ear,  he  would  speak  now  what  he  may  not  be 


12  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.       [Chap.  X. 

able  to  speak  then,  and  would  give  them  the  assurance, 
that  he  has  forgiven  and  from  his  innermost  heart  does 
forgive  all. 

But  even  these  tender  and  affectionate  words  of  the 
pastor  failed  to  reconcile  the  opponents  in  the  congrega- 
tion. A  secession  took  place.  Under  the  name  "St. 
James'  English  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,"  a  new 
congregation  was  organized  at  Twelfth  and  Melon 
Streets,  Philadelphia.  In  a  communication  to  the 
Lutheran  Observer,  dated  September  14,  i860,  and 
signed  R.  W.  P.  (Robert  W.  Patrick),  the  new  move- 
ment was  explained  and  justified  as  follows : 

We  have  been  driven  from  the  communion  of  St. 
Mark's  Lutheran  Church  because  a  few  officious  men 
wished  to  introduce  forms  and  ceremonies  into  the 
worship  of  Almighty  God  to  which  we  as  members  of 
the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  were  told  we  must  submit 
without  the  privilege  on  our  part  of  dissenting  or  pro- 
testing. .  .  .  "The  gown,"  as  our  opponents  say, 
"is  a  small  matter,"  which  we  most  cordially  admit. 
-  .  .  But  it  was  not  the  gown,  it  was  principle,  glor- 
ious principle,  for  which  some  of  us  would  just  as  soon 
sacrifice  our  property,  our  position,  nay,  even  our  lives, 
if  called  upon,  and  necessary  so  to  do.  It  was  not  the 
introduction  of  a  few  yards  of  silk  promiscuously  hung 
around  the  shoulders  of  the  preacher,  that  caused  us  to 
withdraw  from  St.  Mark's.  It  was  because  the  liberties 
of  the  congregation  were  trampled  on,  their  dearest  rights 
invaded;  for  a  congregational  meeting,  which  every- 
where has  the  power  of  either  assenting  or  dissenting 
from  the  form  introduced  for  the  first  time  into  the 
worship  of  the  congregation,  was  denied  them.  We  are 
regularly  organized,  have  elected  a  board  of  officers, 
adopted  a  constitution  and  bylaws.  At  our  last  meeting 
we  elected  a  delegate  to  represent  us  in  the  East  Penn- 
sylvania Synod  to  which  we  intend  to  apply  for  admis- 
sion. 


1859-61.]  ST.   JAMES'   CHURCH.  1 3 

This  new  enterprise,  however,  was  quite  short-lived. 
About  a  year  afterwards  the  announcement  was  made 
that  "on  account  of  the  stringency  of  the  times  St. 
James'  Church  found  it  necessary  to  suspend  services." 
An  attempt  to  resuscitate  it  by  calHng  the  Rev.  Charles 
Stork  of  Baltimore,  son  of  the  first  pastor  of  St.  Mark's, 
proved  unsuccessful. 

Meanwhile  what  had  originally  been  merely  a  local 
difficulty  in  one  of  the  Philadelphia  Churches  had  taken 
a  wider  range  and  had  become  the  subject  of  a  general 
and  rather  violent  controversy  in  the  Church  at  large. 
The  action  of  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania,  in  June, 
i860,  at  its  meeting  in  St.  Paul's  German  Church,  Phila- 
delphia, "requesting  all  ministers  within  its  bounds  as 
far  as  convenient,  to  resume  the  use  of  the  clerical  gown" 
gave  the  moral  support  of  the  venerable  Mother  Synod 
to  the  pastor  of  St.  Mark's  and  his  people,  though  they 
did  not,  at  that  time,  belong  to  the  Ministerium.  But  the 
publication  of  the  discourses  on  Christian  Liberty  was  the 
principal  occasion  for  rousing  the  bitter  opposition  of  the 
champions  of  "American  Lutheranism,"  Dr.  B.  Kurtz 
and  Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker. 

The  former,  in  a  sermon  on  I  Corinthians  xv.  58, 
preached  before  the  Melanchthon  Synod  at  Mechanics- 
burg,  Md.,  September  2,  i860,  sent  forth  one  of  his  char- 
acteristic tirades.  After  denouncing  the  Lutheran 
doctrine  on  the  Lord's  Supper  as  one  of  the  "wild  fancies 
pillaged  from  the  dusty  tomes  of  erring  fathers  incor- 
porated in  presentations  of  doctrine  as  understood  in  the 
age  in  which  those  presentations  were  written,  but  now 
metamorphosed  into  authoritative  creeds,  and  attempted 
to  be  foisted  upon  us  as  setting  forth  the  infallible  truth 
of  God,"  he  turns  to  the  subject  of  clerical  robes  in  the 
following  language : 

The  gown  in  itself  is,  perhaps,  a  harmless  human  con- 


14  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.      [Chap.  X. 

trivance,  but  as  part  and  parcel  of  an  obnoxious  system, 
comprehending  baptismal  regeneration,  the  real  presence, 
wearisome  and  monotonous  liturgical  services  and  the 
entire  paraphernalia  of  high  churchism,  it  is  to  be  depre- 
cated as  an  additional  rivet  to  the  various  fastenings  of 
the  whole  machinery.  No  wonder  that  Christ  and  His 
Apostles  so  carefully  abstained  from  all  these  ostenta- 
tious trappings,  that  they  worshipped  in  all  the  inborn 
simplicity  of  the  Gospel,  and  that  these  figments  should 
find  no  footing  in  the  Church  until  gradual  degeneracy 
in  doctrine  and  practice  first  opened  the  way.  O,  for  a 
clap  of  thunder,  as  loud  as  to  be  heard  throughout  the 
universe,  to  explode  all  vain  displays  and  dangerous 
errors,  and  to  condemn  them! 

A  few  weeks  afterwards  Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker  pub- 
lished a  discourse  on  "The  Spiritual  Worship  of  God" 
delivered  before  the  Lutheran  Synod  of  West  Pennsyl- 
vania, September  30,  i860.  The  sermon  was  based  on 
John  iv.  24,  and  undertook  to  set  forth  "  The  spirituality 
of  all  acceptable  worship  of  God"  under  the  following 
heads:  i.  Outward  means  of  grace  are  necessary 
auxiliaries  to  spiritual  worship  in  man.  2.  These  out- 
ward ordinances  being  designed  as  channels  of  divine 
truth,  are  of  little  value  to  divine  worship,  unless  so 
presented  as  actually  to  convey  it.  3.  True  spiritual 
worship  consists  in  a  proper  estimate  and  use  of  both. 
When  this  sermon  was  published  Dr.  Schmucker  "felt 
it  a  duty  to  add  a  short  appendix,  presenting  the  relevant 
historic  facts  and  a  few  arguments  against  the  use  of  the 
gown."  The  presentations  made  in  this  discourse  were 
of  such  importance  in  the  estimation  of  the  author  that 
he  imposed  upon  his  students  in  the  theological  seminary 
the  task  of  committing  its  salient  points  to  memory. 

Dr.  Krauth  promptly  took  up  the  gauntlet  and 
answered  his  assailants  in  the  Lutheran  in  an  article 
sparkling  with  wit  and  humor,  and  yet,  at  the  same  time 


i8s9-6i.]  THE  ENEMIES  OF  THE  GOWN.  15 

full  of  Stern  and  manly  rebuke.  Under  the  head  "A 
M elanchthonian  Pronunciamento"  he  reviewed  the  above 
mentioned  sermon  of  Dr.  Kurtz  as  follows : 

The  first  point  that  strikes  the  thoughtful  reader  as  he 
peruses  it,  is  the  ingenuity  of  the  thing.  The  text  is  an 
encouragement  of  the  christian  laborer  by  the  blessed 
hope  of  the  resurrection.  Apropos  of  this,  by  way  of 
application  we  have  an  assault  on  creeds,  liturgies, 
gowns,  tapers,  crucifixes,  and  their  supposed  aiders  and 
abettors.  The  extract  abounds  in  what  looks  like  the 
most  flagrant  misrepresentation  of  the  doctrines  of  the 
Church  whose  name  the  preacher  bears,  and  the  most 
wanton  appeals  to  ignorance  and  prejudice.  It  seems 
calculated  to  move  the  worst  feelings  of  the  unsanctified 
heart,  to  make  brethren,  who  have  really  nothing  to 
divide  them,  hate  each  other,  to  cultivate  a  spirit  of  self- 
righteousness  and  censoriousness,  and  to  set  christian 
ministers  upon  a  heartless  crusade  against  each  other. 
It  looks  and  seems,  we  say,  for  if  there  be  any  connection 
whatever  between  the  sermon  and  the  text,  all  these 
things,  however  ugly  their  guise,  are  really  the  work  of 
the  Lord,  the  labor  of  the  Lord  which  is  not  in  vain,  but 
•which  is  to  receive  its  reward  in  the  recompense  of  the 
just.  .  .  .  Some  time  ago  a  very  respectable 
Lutheran  congregation,  through  its  constitutional  repre- 
sentative, a  highly  intelligent  Church  Council,  saw  fit  to 
request  its  pastor  to  conform  to  the  order  of  service 
recommended  by  the  General  Synod,  and  also,  in  con- 
sonance with  what  had  been  the  prevalent  usage  of  the 
locality,  to  wear  the  black  gown.  He  complied  with 
their  very  reasonable  request.  Out  of  respect  to  the 
difficulties  which  these  changes  produced  in  the  minds 
of  a  few  of  his  people,  he  preached  two  sermons  on  the 
general  principles  of  christian  liberty,  with  a  special 
reference  to  the  use  of  it  which  had  been  made  in  this 
case.  Though  the  principles  were  such  as  are  common 
to  almost  all  the  Protestant  world,  the  sermons  were 
eagerly  caught  at  outside  of  the  congregation,  and  a 


l6  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.      [Chap.  X. 

Strenuous  and  persistent  effort  made  to  gather  from  them, 
something  in  which  radicalism  might  find  its  own 
partizan  account.  The  curious  anomaly  has  been  pre- 
sented, of  men  belonging  to  the  Lutheran  Church,  the 
most  conservative  of  all  Churches,  trying  to  proscribe  a 
congregation  for  a  step  which  really  has  nothing  in  it 
inconsistent  with  the  most  ultra  Puritanism.  If  the 
gown  has  been  made  a  cover  for  any  phase  of  doctrine 
or  tendency,  it  has  been  made  such  by  its  opponents, — 
they  have  caught  hold  of  it,  they  have  persisted  in  seeing 
in  it  what  is  not  in  it,  and  have  freely  used  the  oldest  and 
most  widely  circulated  paper  in  the  Church,  not  merely 
to  ridicule  our  usages,  but  to  assail  with  the  grossest 
personalities  those  whose  only  offense  is  that  they  claim 
for  themselves  the  rights  enjoyed  by  all  other  Lutheran 
congregations.  It  is  into  this  controversy  that  the 
sermon  before  us  throws  itself. 

The  first  picture  of  Dr.  Kurtz  that  was  ever  given  to- 
the  world,  represents  him  in  a  gown.  Did  he  find,  as 
he  wore  it  in  the  pulpits  in  Germany  to  which  he  was  so 
cordially  invited,  when  he  was  begging  money  for  our 
infant  "German  Lutheran  Seminary,"  did  he  find  those 
awful  "proclivities"  coming  over  him,  which  he  so  feel- 
ingly describes?  The  very  best  work  he  ever  did  for 
the  Lord  and  His  Church,  was  at  an  era  when  he  did 
not  object  to  wearing  the  "paraphernalia"  and  the  "osten- 
tatious trappings"  and  going  through  what  he  now  pro- 
nounces "most  acceptable  to  those  who  have  the  least 
piety  but  desire  to  make  the  most  plausible  appearance?" 
How  could  the  Doctor,  who  is  an  appreciator  of  humor, 
as  well  as  the  possessor  of  a  large  fund  of  it,  how  could 
he  keep  his  face  straight  during  portions  of  the  sermon? 
when,  for  instance,  he  identified  the  sort  of  dress  in 
which  Luther  and  Calvin,  Arndt  and  Gerhardt,  Spener 
and  Francke,  Wesley  and  Whitfield,  Knox  and  Chalmers, 
Muehlenberg  and  the  Doctor's  own  venerable  uncle, 
preached  the  everlasting  Gospel, — identified  this  with 
"encumbering  the  Gospel  with  human  inventions,  bediz- 
ening it  with  golden  chains,  decorating  it  with  wreaths 


1859-61.]  DR.  KURTZ  AND  THE  FATHERS.  ,7 

of  artificial  flowers,  and  garnishing  it  with  clusters  of 
flaunting  ribbons  ?" 

The  poctor  says,  "the  fathers  of  Lutheranism  are 
erring."  That  is  his  opinion,  and  it  means  no  more  than 
that  they  do  not  agree  with  him.  It  is  easier  to  say  that 
they  erred  than  it  is  to  prove  it.  And  why  charge  upon 
them  that  they  are  "dusty?"  The  Old  Lutherans,  we 
presume,  do  not  let  theirs  get  dusty.  If  the  Doctor's 
fathers  are  "dusty,"  that  is  his  fault,  not  theirs.  If  he  will 
not  stretch  forth  a  hand  and  a  dusting  brush  to  his  copies 
of  them,  which  we  presume,  are  not  so  many  as  to  make 
the  work  an  arduous  one,  he  ought  not  to  blame  them 
that  they  will  not  come  from  glory  to  do  it  for  him. 

After  quoting  from  Dr.  Kurtz's  book.  "Why  Are  You 
a  Lutheran?"  to  confute  the  Doctor  by  his  own  language, 
Dr.  Krauth  addresses  the  following  rebuke  to  him : 

Out  of  our  general  habitude  of  cheerfulness  we  have 
tried  to  take  the  Doctor's  sermon  in  a  way  that  would 
pam  us  least.  However  our  views  differ  from  his  we 
would  desire  always  to  remember  him  as  the  ready 'and 
forcible  writer  and  the  active  laborer  in  our  Zion.  He 
has  spent  many  toilsome  years  in  the  service  of  the 
Church  As  a  faithful  pastor,  as  an  active  and  successful 
agent  for  our  seminary,  as  an  editor,  as  the  author  of 
various  books,  each  of  which  has  decided  merit  in  its 
kind  he  IS  entitled  to  an  honorable  place  in  the  history  of 
our  Church  m  America.  Those  who  know  him  in  private 
life  speak  of  his  social  gifts  and  his  felicity  in  conversa- 

A  n"'  u  ^'^^  """""^^  ^"^  "''^''^'  ^"""^  ^^  ^  ^e^^^er  among  men 

All  these  things  in  his  present  attitude  increase  our  sor- 
row. We  are  more  grieved  than  we  can  express  that  so 
clearheaded  a  thinker  should  lend  himself  to  bewilder 
simpehearted  men,  and  confuse  plain  things;  that  a  man 
who  has  done  so  much  to  entitle  him  to 

"that  which  should  accompany  old  age 
as  honor,  love,  obedience,  troops  of  friends" 


1 8  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.      [Chap.  X. 

is  making  it  so  hard  for  some  who  desire  most  heartily 
that  he  should  have  tfhem  all,  to  avoid  the  feeling  that  he 
is  sacrificing  to  partisanship  what  should  be  given  to  the 
whole  Church.  We  respect  the  true  fathers  of "  the 
Church — the  living  and  the  dead,  and  when  Dr.  K. 
speaks  as  one  of  them,  speaks  as  he  has  shown  himself 
able  to  speak,  when  happier  influences  than  those  to 
which  he  now  surrenders  himself,  prompted  his  utter- 
ances, we  listen  to  him  with  the  respect  due  to  truth,  and 
the  reverence  which  should  wait  upon  wisdom  matured 
by  years.  Let  him  strive  for  the  peace  of  the  Church — 
let  him  cease  to  utter  and  print  sentiments  which  can 
only  tend  to  heartburning  and  hostility, — let  him  not 
lend  his  hand  to  the  sundering  of  the  Church,  and  to  the 
leaving  behind  him  as  a  part  of  his  work,  the  spirit  of 
faction,  of  radicalism,  and  of  hatred  between  brethren, 
and  the  Lutheran,  which  knows  no  party,  will  feel  as 
profound  a  pleasure  in  the  grateful  acknowledgment  of 
his  better  spirit,  as  it  felt  the  deep  pain  connected  with 
these  necessary  strictures.      (*October  19,  i860.) 

Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker's  discourse  on  spiritual  worship 
was  subjected  to  a  scathing  but  dignified  criticism  in  the 
Lutheran  of  December  7,  i860,  concluding  with  the  wish 
"that  the  Doctor  had  never  written,  never  preached,  and, 
above  all,  never  published  it." 

The  "Appendix  on  Clerical  Robes,"  "which  some,  in 
their  wickedness,  may  perchance  regard  as  meant  to  be 
the  salient  point  of  the  whole  publication"  thinking,  "that 
the  whole  discourse  was  framed  as  a  rack  for  the  support 
of  a  certain  caudal  appendage  which  adorns  it," — was 
taken  up  somewhat  more  humorously  in  the  Lutheran  of 
April  19  and  May  3,  1861,  under  the  headings  "The 
Autocracy  of  the  Tailor  vs.  the  Liberty  of  the  Church," 
and  "Sartor  resartus,"  in  which  it  was  shown  that  both 
the  scriptural  grounds  and  the  manner  of  quoting  theo- 

*The  dates  indicate  the  numbers  of  the  Lutheran  (and  Missionary) 
from  which  these  extracts  are  ta^en. 


i859-6i.]  SARTOR  RESARTUS.  19 

logical  authorities  were  equally  unfortunate  in  Dr. 
Schmucker's  discourse,  and  the  principles  underlying  the 
whole  dispute  are  once  more  forcibly  pointed  out  in  the 
following  words : 

It  is  an  astonishing  phenomenon  in  a  Church  calling 
itself  Evangelical  Lutheran,  that  there  should  be  so  much 
liberty  allowed  where  the  New  Testament  allows  none, — 
we  mean  in  articles  of  faith,  and  so  little  where  the  New 
Testament  allows  all  liberty,  we  mean  in  things  indif- 
ferent. This  is  the  anomalous  and  unhealthy  condition 
of  a  part  of  our  Church  within  the  General  Synod,  but 
truth  in  time  will  vindicate  itself.  We  shall  yet  have  a 
Church  contending  earnestly  for  the  faith  once  delivered 
to  the  Saints,  and  insisting  on  her  liberty  in  all  other 
things,  a  Church  which  shall  neither  bind  the  things  of 
freedom  on  the  conscience,  nor  surrender  the  things  of 
conscience  to  a  spurious  freedom.  This  is  the  unity  of 
the  Lutheran  Church, — at  once  the  purest  and  the  freest 
of  Churches.  May  God  preserve  her  purity,  freedom 
and  unity  for  ever. 

We  give  the  substance  of  the  articles  against  Dr.  S.  S. 
Schmucker  from  the  somewhat  enlarged  and  revised 
form  which  appeared  a  few  years  later  in  the  Lutheran 
and  Missionary  (November  29,  1866). 

It  is  often  said  that  Evangelical  Lutheranism  attaches 
great  importance  to  the  wearing  of  ecclesiastical  vest- 
ments— especially  the  gown,  while  ''American  Lutheran- 
ism" distinguishes  itself  by  violent  hatred  to  the  whole 
thing.  But  as  regards  clerical  robes.  Evangelical  Luther- 
anism has  the  same  moderate  and  Scriptural  position 
which  it  holds  every  where.  As  there  is  nothing  in  con- 
flict with  clerical  robes  in  the  letter  or  spirit  of  the 
Scripture,  it  believes  that  they  may  be  retained  or  used 
without  sin.  In  any  case  they  are  but  parts  of  the  out- 
ward order  and  grace  of  the  service — no  man  is  morally 
better  nor  worse  for  them,  any  more  than  he  is  for  wear- 
ing or  not  wearing  any  other  kind  of  clothing.     If  the 


20  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.       [Chap.  X. 

Church,  one  in  the  faith,  in  this  country,  decide  that 
nothing  distinctive  shall  be  worn  by  the  clergyman,  the 
true  Lutheran  will  cheerfully  yield  to  its  decision.  As 
no  such  decision  has  been  made,  the  question  whether  the 
gown  shall  be  worn  in  this  or  that  case  is  one  to  be  settled 
affirmatively  or  negatively,  with  a  prudent  and  charitable 
reference  to  the  views  and  preferences  of  all  parties  con- 
cerned. A  minister,  and  congregation  and  Synod,  firm 
in  the  faith  of  our  Church,  are  truly  Lutheran,  even  if  a 
gown  was  never  seen  nor  heard  of  among  them, — and 
all  the  gowns  ever  made  will  not  render  a  minister,  con- 
gregation or  Synod  Lutheran  which  is  not  in  the  unity 
of  the  Lutheran  faith.  True  Lutherans,  whether  they 
wear  the  gown  or  not,  are  entirely  united  in  their  doctrine 
in  regard  to  it.  A  man  is  neither  better  nor  worse  for 
wearing  or  not  wearing  it.  Differences  in  raiment  do 
not  mar  unity  in  heart. 

But  it  has  been  urged  against  the  usage  of  our  Church 
that  the  Saviour  and  his  apostles  wore  no  distinctive 
dress. 

How  easy  would  it  be,  by  carrying  out  this  absurd 
mode  of  reasoning,  to  justify  the  greatest  vagaries  of  an 
extravagant  fancy  in  regard  to  dress.  As  the  ordinary 
dress  of  men  in  the  apostolic  time  did  not  differ  essen- 
tially from  that  of  the  women,  it  might  be  urged  that  it 
is  in  conflict  with  inspired  example  that  there  should  be 
any  essential  difference  now.  Bloomerism  might  build 
up  on  the  New  Testament  an  argument  against  men's 
wearing  distinctive  attire,  much  more  plausible  than  that 
urged  against  clerical  robes.  They  might  claim  some- 
thing in  the  very  letter  which  has  not  been  claimed 
against  clerical  robes — they  might  point  to  the  declara- 
tion that,  on  the  ground  of  the  new  dispensation,  all  dis- 
tinctions of  the  sort  implied  are  ignored :  "There  is 
neither  male  nor  female."  And  when  it  came  to  infer- 
ences, and  to  the  argument  from  silence,  Bloomerism, 
that  great  vestiarian  heresy  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
might  make  a  brilliant  defence — and,  in  fact,  carry  the 
war  to  the  very  gates  of  Carthage.     Headed  with  the 


1859-61.]       DRESS  AND  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  2 1 

words,  "Of  the  Gender  of  Dress,"  mutatis  mutatidis,  the 
argument  against  a  proper  clerical  apparel  would  make 
an  admirable  Bloomer  tract,  for  the  diffusion  of  the 
peculiar  views  on  the  subject  of  apparel  which  have  given 
to  history  the  name  of  that  immortal  woman.  Imagine 
Mrs.  Bloomer  taking  up  these  principles  to  build  an  argu- 
ment on.  Adopting  them  as  a  guide,  she  might  argue 
that  for  men  and  women  to  dress  in  ways  essentially 
different,  is  against  all  New  Testament  example,  that  the 
apostles  wore  flowing  dresses  like  women,  that  it  is  a 
safe  principle  to  dress  as  far  as  practicable  on  the  prin- 
ciples which  regulated  the  clothing  of  the  early  Chris- 
tians, that  pantaloons  are  unscriptural,  there  being  no 
New  Testament  injunction  to  wear  them  "in  preaching," 
or  at  any  other  time;  that,  on  the  contrary,  "various 
passages  teach  that  every  thing  typical  in  the  Mosaic 
ritual,  of  which  breeches  (Exod.  xxviii.  42)  were  a  part, 
is  superseded  in  the  New  Testament."  She  might  go  on 
to  urge,  "that,  like  the  uniform  of  soldiers,  and  the 
insignia  of  freemasonry" — coats,  hats  and  pantaloons 
"have  a  tendency  to  attract  the  attention"  of  ladies  to  the 
gentlemen,  "and  in  so  far  to  divert  it  from"  much  more 
important  things;  that  they  "are  calculated  to  minister 
to  the  pride  and  vanity  of"  men,  who  are  human 
creatures,  "of  like  infirmities  with"  the  ladies;  and  that 
though  some  men  who  have  distinctive  dress  are  humble 
and  good,  "yet  these  exceptions  cannot  overthrow  the 
general  rule."  She  might  say  that,  as  a  general  similarity 
of  the  dress  of  the  sexes  was  commenced  in  paradise, 
Gen.  iii.  7,  21,  and,  for  a  long  time,  was  universal,  a 
distinctive  dress  for  men  is  an  innovation,  that  a 
majority  of  mankind  still  keep  up  a  substantial  uni- 
formity in  this  matter  between  males  and  females,  and 
that,  therefore,  it  would  be  better  for  those  who  depart 
from  the  general  principle,  to  conform  to  it,  than  for  the 
majority  to  depart  from  it;  that  there  are  many  incon- 
veniences in  ladies'  dresses  which  tempt  them  to  neglect 
their  duties,  especially  when  the  weather  is  stormy,  and 
the  streets  muddy ;  and  finally  that  such  a  distinction  is  in 


22  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.       [Chap.  X. 

conflict  with  the  equaHty  between  the  sexes  acknowledged 
in  our  modern  civiHzation,  is  inconsistent  with  the  Decla- 
ration of  Independence,  which  assumes  that  all  human  be- 
ings (among  whom  it  is  conceded  that  ladies  are  to  be 
classed,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  who  are  angels,)  are 
equal,  and  being  inconsistent  with  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  is  in  conflict  with  the  Federal  and  State 
Constitutions,  the  principles  of  republican  democracy, 
the  stars  and  stripes,  the  eagle,  and  the  Fourth  of  July. 
If  Mrs.  Bloomer,  after  recovering  from  the  loss  of 
breath  consequent  on  such  an  accumulation  of  items, 
should  assert  that  this  scandalous  diversity  must  cease, 
and  that  as  the  men  don't  wish  to  dress  like  the  women, 
the  women  shall  dress  like  the  men — what  could  we  do? 
Resistance  or  submission  would  be  the  alternative;  and 
to  the  gentlemen  that  alternative  always  means  submis- 
sion. We  should  be  compelled  not  only  to  give  her  the 
last  word,  but  meekly  to  surrender  the  article  of  apparel 
which  she  had  shown  herself  so  competent  to  wear. 
"  Detur  pulchriori." 

Over  against  the  Puritanizing  superstition  against 
clerical  apparel,  equally  as  against  the  Romish  supersti- 
tion in  favor  of  what  is  gaudy  and  excessive,  the  true 
Lutheran  maintains  the  just  freedom  of  the  Christian 
Church  to  have  her  ministers  at  her  altars  apparelled  in 
just  that  mode  which  she  deems  best  on  the  whole  for  the 
proper  performance  of  all  their  functions,  not  enjoining 
on  the  conscience  what  Gk)d  has  not  enjoined,  and  not 
forbidding  what  God  has  not  forbidden. 

In  what  conflict  with  this  is  the  real  attitude  of  a  false 
Lutheranism.  It  does  not  regulate  its  feelings  or  con- 
duct in  this  matter,  on  any  fixed  principles.  Its  friends 
will  not  only  accept,  but  will  allow  themselves  to  seek, 
and  sometimes  very  eagerly  seek  positions  in  which  the 
gown  is  worn ;  and  then  again,  where  partisan  interest 
leads  them  the  other  way,  they  will  assail  the  wearing  of 
the  gown  as  a  very  pernicious  and  Popish  thing.  No 
advocate  of  clerical  robes  in  our  Church  has  ever  consi- 
dered  a   defence   of   them   an    appropriate    subject    for 


1589-61. J     FALSE  LUTHERANISM  INCONSISTENT.  23 

sacramental  meditation ;  but  the  opponents  of  them  have 
thought  their  opposition  so  important  as  to  justify  a 
thrusting  of  it  in  the  place  of  Christ  crucified  at  His  very 
table.  Here,  as  every  where  in  which  the  false  Luth- 
eranism  completely  escapes  from  the  influence  of  the 
true,  it  is  harsh,  intolerant,  fickle,  and  inconsistent,  and 
here,  as  every  where  in  which  the  faith  is  not  involved. 
Evangelical  Lutheranism  is  mild  and  forbearing.  This 
is  the  Lutheranism  we  love,  and  to  which  we  would 
consecrate  our  efforts,  humble  but  sincere.  Earnest, 
therefore,  as  is  our  desire  to  see  one  Scriptural  church- 
like form  of  service  throughout  our  land,  whose  outward 
robes  shall  be  in  keeping  with  its  internal  beauty,  a 
service  which  shall  neither  take  what  is  evil,  nor  reject 
what  is  good,  because  others  have  it,  a  service  evolved 
from  the  proper  devotional  life  of  our  Church,  the 
richest,  purest,  and  noblest  devotional  life  the  Church  of 
Christ  has  ever  had,  while  we  pray  for  this,  and  labor 
and  forbear  for  this,  yet  this,  grand  as  it  is,  is  little 
when  compared  with  the  object  of  our  most  fervent 
prayer.  That  prayer  which  we  should  breathe  for  our 
Zion  were  these  our  dying  words,  would  be,  that  we  may 
"  all  come  in  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect  man,  unto  the  measure 
of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ,  that  we  may 
henceforth  be  no  more  children,  tossed  to  and  fro,  and 
carried  about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine,  by  the  sleight 
of  men,  and  cunning  craftiness  whereby  they  lie  in  wait 
to  deceive ;  but  speaking  the  truth  in  love,  may  grow  up 
into  Him  in  all  things,  which  is  the  head,  even  Christ." 

RESIGNATION    FROM    THE    PASTORATE   OF   ST.    MARk's. 

On  the  first  of  October,  1861,  Dr.  Krauth  read  the 
following  statement  to  the  Church  Council  of  St.  Mark's 
Congregation : 

I  have  been  invited  to  become  the  editor  of  a  paper 
devoted  to  the  interest  of  the  Lutheran  Church  and  of 
our  common   Christianity,   to  be   issued   weekly  in  the 


24  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.      [Chap.  X. 

City  of  Philadelphia.  The  conviction  is  general  in  the 
Church  that  a  good  paper  is  at  this  time  most  impera- 
tively needed.  The  unanimous  sentiment  of  those  to 
whom  the  selection  of  an  editor  was  entrusted,  fixed 
itself  on  me,  and  from  many  influential  sources  I  have 
been  urged  to  accept  the  position  thus  offered.  The 
most  serious  obstacle  in  my  way  is  my  reluctance  to 
give  up,  in  any  measure,  the  pastoral  work :  my  heart 
inclines  me  to  give  myself  to  it,  not  less  unreservedly 
than  in  the  past,  but  more  so.  But  the  indications  of 
Providence  which  would  lead  me  to  assume  a  large  part 
of  the  responsibility  in  the  establishment  of  the  new 
paper  seem  to  me  of  the  most  marked  kind.  Without 
having  reached  therefore  an  absolutely  final  conclusion, 
I  feel  that  I  am  drawn  more  and  more  toward  the  con- 
viction that  I  should  edit  the  paper  for  the  earlier 
months,  if  not  for  the  first  year  of  its  existence.  This 
decision  may  in  your  judgment  render  advisable  a  change 
of  the  relations  I  now  occupy  to  St.  Mark's  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church.  For  though  it  is  true  that  in  a 
number  of  cases  church  papers  are  edited  by  pastors 
confessedly  efficient  in  their  work,  and  though  by  rigid 
system  and  earnest  labor  it  might  be  possible  for  some 
men  to  perform  in  a  good  degree  the  work  of  both 
offices,  I  am  not  willing  to  assume  any  such  ability  in 
my  own  case,  but  commit  it  rather  to  your  fraternal 
judgment  as  to  those  who  in  all  good  conscience  before 
God  will  consult  the  best  interests  of  St.  Mark's  congre- 
gation as  its  Council,  and  of  our  whole  Church  as  faith- 
ful members. 

Two  weeks  afterwards  his  formal  resignation  was 
presented  and  accepted,  but  he  continued  to  serve  the 
church  to  the  close  of  the  year.  On  November  4,  1861, 
the  Rev.  G.  F.  Krotel,  pastor  of  the  Church  of  the  Holy 
Trinity  in  Lancaster,  Pennsylvania,  was  elected  as  his 
successor  and  entered  upon  his  work  on  January  5, 
1862.  In  the  very  first  year  of  his  pastorate  St.  Mark's 
congregation  was  dismissed  from  the  East  Pennsylvania 
Synod  to  join  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania,  much  to 


i8s9-6i.]        ST.  MARK'S  AND  "  THE  OBSERVER."  25 

the  chagrin  of  the  Lutheran  Observer,  which  denounced 
their  course  as  "  very  unreasonable.  The  church  was 
born  in  a  revival,  has  been  built  up  under  the  influence 
of  revivals,  and  belonged  to  a  Synod  that  loved  and 
cherished  revivals,  and  now  it  has  gone  over,  soul  and 
body,  to  a  Synod  that,  as  such,  has  always  been  bitterly 
opposed  to  revivals.  Now,  what  are  we  to  infer  from 
this?  Why,  that  St.  Mark's  has  repudiated  revivals 
....  has  lost  the  spirit  of  revivals."  (Lutheran  Ob- 
server, October  17,  1862.) 

IN    THE    EAST    PENNSYLVANIA    SYNOD. 

Dr.  Krauth  was  received  as  a  member  of  the  East 
Pennsylvania  Synod  at  Sunbury.  September,  i860,  and 
at  once  placed  on  its  Examining  Committee,  instead  of 
Dr.  C.  A.  Hay,  who  had  been  elected  President.  This 
Synod  had  been  organized  in  1842  by  a  number  of 
clerg)^men  who,  being  dissatisfied  with  the  spirit  of  the 
Ministerium,  the  lack  of  "  harmony  of  views  and  feel- 
ings." the  largeness  of  the  Mother-synod,  the  difficulties 
arising  from  the  difference  of  language,  German  and 
English,  had  asked  the  Synod  of  Pennsylvania  "  forth- 
with to  take  measures  for  an  amicable  division  of  the 
Pennsylvania  Synod,  claiming  a  fair  proportion  of  all 
the  funds  and  legacies  belonging  to  the  Synod."  The 
Ministerium  declined  to  give  its  consent  to  a  division  but 
declared  its  willingness  to  grant  an  honorable  dismission 
as  individuals  to  those  brethren  who  desired  to  separate 
from  it.  For  some  time  there  was  considerable  friction 
between  the  two  bodies,  the  Mother-synod  refusing  to 
receive  the  first  delegate  of  the  East  Pennsylvania  Synod. 
A  better  feeling  was  initiated  in  the  proceedings  of  1850 
when  the  East  Pennsylvania  Synod  formally  disavowed 
a  certain  "Circular"  which  had  given  offense  to  the 
Ministerium,  charging  it  with  a  design  "  to  introduce 
ministers  from  Germany  who  are  rationalistic,  unevan- 


26  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.      [Chap.  X, 

gelical  or  infidel  in  their  sentiments,  and  immoral  in 
their  conduct,  and  to  do  injustice  to  brethren  born  and 
educated  in  this  country." 

In  i860  at  the  meeting  of  the  East  Pennsylvania 
Synod  which  admitted  Dr.  Krauth  into  its  membership, 
an  important  discussion  took  place  on  the  motion  intro- 
duced by  Dr.  C.  A.  Hay:  "  That  the  constitution  of  this- 
Synod  be  so  amended  as  to  entitle  all  its  members,  clerical 
and  lay,  to  participate  in  the  transaction  of  all  ecclesias- 
tical business."  This  movement  aimed  to  abolish  the- 
so-called  "  Ministerial  Sessions,"  which  had  been  a 
venerable  tradition  in  the  Pennsylvania  Ministerium 
and  the  Synods  that  proceeded  from  it,  ever  since  the 
days  of  Father  Muehlenberg.  Dr.  Hay  denounced  it  as 
"  a  relic  of  prelatical  pretensions  which  should  be  aban- 
doned, having  no  support  in  Scripture  or  sound 
exegesis."  His  position  was  strenuously  opposed  by 
Drs.  J.  A.  Seiss  and  C.  P.  Krauth.  The  former  re- 
minded the  Synod  of  the  fact  that  the  very  same  move- 
ment had  been  made  in  the  Synods  of  Maryland,  of 
Virginia  and  West  Pennsylvania,  and  had,  in  every  case 
been  defeated.  Dr.  Krauth  maintained  that  the  op- 
ponents of  the  Ministerium  could  not  produce  a  single- 
Scripture  passage  for  the  participation  of  laymen  in  the 
examination  and  ordination  of  candidates  for  the 
ministry.  On  the  other  hand  there  were  clear  passages 
to  show  that  such  powers  had  been  conferred  on  the 
ministry,  as  in  the  words  of  St.  Paul  to  Titus :  "  That 
thou  shouldst  ordain  elders  in  every  city."  He  also 
referred  to  the  Liturgy  of  the  General  Synod  in  its  form 
of  ordination  for  the  Gospel  ministry,  which  declares: 
"  The  first  preachers  of  the  Gospel  received  their  com- 
mission from  the  Lord  Himself,  and  they  ordained,  by 
the  laying  on  of  hands,  such  as  they  deemed  qualified  to 
be  their  fellow  laborers  and  successors.     Thus  has  one 


1859-61.]  ENTERS    THE    MINISTERIUM.  2/ 

minister  ordained  another  to  the  service  of  Christ  down 
to  the  present  time."  The  discussion  resulted  in  the 
defeat  of  Dr.  Hay's  motion. 

In  order  to  put  an  end  to  the  unhappy  collisions 
between  the  two  Synods  occupying  the  same  territory, 
to  bring  about  better  relations  or  possibly  to  unite  the 
two  bodies  into  one,  Dr.  E.  Greenwald,  who  had  repre- 
sented the  East  Pennsylvania  Synod  at  the  meeting  of 
the  Ministerium  in  Allentown,  1862,  suggested  the 
appointment  of  a  Committee  from  each  Synod  for  a 
final  settlement  of  the  disputed  points.  This  was  done, 
and  two  different  plans  were  afterwards  offered,  one  by 
Dr.  Greenwald,  proposing  a  geographical  line  of 
division ;  the  other  by  Dr.  G.  F.  Krotel,  proposing  a 
union  of  the  two  Synods,  as  "  The  United  Synod  of  the 
Ministerium,  etc.,  and  the  Synod  of  East  Pennsylvania." 
The  Ministerium  at  its  meeting  in  Reading,  1863,  de- 
clared the  union  to  be  eminently  desirable  and  adopted 
certain  positions  as  the  basis  for  the  projected  union. 
But  the  conference  held  in  Philadelphia,  in  1863,  for  the 
purpose  of  making  arrangements  for  a  joint  convention, 
to  discuss  the  proposed  union  of  the  two  Synods  failed 
to  accomplish  its  end. 

Dr.  Krauth  does  not  seem  to  have  taken  an  active 
part  in  the  discussion  of  this  subject.  On  October  17, 
1864,  he  was  dismissed  by  the  Synod  of  East  Pennsyl- 
vania to  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania,  which  re- 
ceived him  into  membership  at  Easton,  June,  1865. 


ELEVENTH  CHAPTER. 

EDITOR  OF  THE   LUTHERAN   AND   MISSIONARY. 
1861-1867. 

When  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth  resigned  his  pastorate  of  St. 
Mark's  congregation  to  take  charge  of  the  Lutheran 
and  Missionary ,  as  editor-in-chief,  he  entered  upon  that 
sphere  of  his  hfe  work  in  which  he  exerted  an  influence 
more  important  and  far  reaching  than  in  any  other 
department  of  church  work  to  which  he  was  called. 
The  reader  will  remember  that  long  before  this  time  he 
had  made  his  debut  in  church-journalism,  as  a  young 
man  of  twenty-three,  when,  in  the  spring  of  1846,  he 
undertook  to  furnish  the  editorials  for  the  Lutheran 
Observer,  during  the  absence  of  Dr.  Benjamin  Kurtz 
in  Europe.  The  articles  which  he  contributed  made  such 
an  impression  on  the  readers  that,  even  at  that  time,  the 
wish  was  expressed,  that  the  youthful  editor  might  be 
continued  in  this  office.      (See  Vol.  I,  pp.  74,  75.) 

Ten  years  afterwards  he  had  become  a  regular  con- 
tributor to  the  Missionary,  edited  by  Dr.  W.  A. 
Passavant,  in  Pittsburgh, — the  paper  of  which  his  father 
had  so  hopefully  spoken  as  the  possible  "  antidote  "  to 
the  Lutheran  Observer.  (Vol.  I,  pp.  300,  f.,  372.) 
During  his  pastorate  in  St.  Mark's,  Philadelphia,  he  had 
been  engaged  in  regular  editorial  work.  The  Lutheran 
Home  Jourttal,  a  monthly  in  pamphlet  form,  had  been 
merged  with  the  Lutheran,  and  in  July,  i860,  there 
appeared  the  first  number  of  The  Lutheran  and  Home 
Journal,  a  semi-monthly,  published  by  Henry  KnaufT 
and  Henry  W.  Knauff,  and  "  edited  by  a  Committee  of 
28 


1861-67.]         INTRODUCING  "  THE  LUTHERAN."  29 

clergymen,"  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth  acting  as  editor-in-chiefj 
and  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss  as  the  principal  associate,  though 
their  names  did  not  appear  in  the  paper. 

In  the  "Apology  for  our  Existence"  the  editor  says : 

We  wish  our  paper  to  be  truly  Lutheran.  It  will 
maintain  the  doctrines  taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
and  confessed  by  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church. 
The  distinctive  usages,  history,  liturgical,  devotional 
and  practical  spirit  of  our  Church  will  be  illustrated  in 
its  pages.  Our  paper  will  be  catholic.  It  will  not 
ground  itself  upon  what  has  been  accidentally  associated 
in  particular  nationalities  with  Lutheranism,  but  will 
look  at  our  Church  in  its  great  essential  and  invariable 
principles,  and  endeavor  to  apply  them  to  the  new  cir- 
cumstances which  surround  her  in  this  land As 

the  other  papers  of  our  Church  are  established  not  by 
any  official  sanction,  but  because  of  the  private  convic- 
tion that  they  are  needed,  we  hope  that  our  private  and 
very  sincere  conviction  that  we  are  also  badly  needed, 
may  be  considered  as  furnishing  some  warrant  for  our 

appearance If  any  of  the  other  papers  are  fixed 

in  the  opinion  that  there  are  too  many  of  us,  we  shall 
defer  to  their  judgment  with  the  reverence  which  we  feel 
to  be  due  to  superior  age;  and  should  they,  under  the 
urgings  of  their  logic  and  of  their  consciences  feel  it 
their  duty  to  withdraw  from  the  field,  and  make  a  bed 
of  their  laurels,  we  shall  do  our  best  to  secure  them  the 
praise  they  would  merit  by  such  an  act  of  self-sacrifice. 
....  We  feel  it  our  duty  to  labor  with  all  our  power 
to  make  the  Lutheran  such  a  paper  as  would  mitigate,  in 
some  measure,  the  sorrow  of  the  Church  at  the  loss  of 
her  ancient  favorites.  But  if  they  shall  obstinately  de- 
cline to  die,  to  retire,  to  merge,  or  even  to  "  dovetail  " 
for  our  advantage,  they  have  no  reason  to  fear  us.  They 
have  the  ground  pre-occupied  and  have  an  established 
character.  Our  only  hope  is  in  furnishing  the  Church 
with  a  paper  which  shall,  in  some  respects,  more  per- 
fectly meet  her  wants  than  our  cotemporaries  are  able 
to  do. 


30  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XL 

Up  to  that  time  the  Lutheran  Observer,  estabHshed  in 
1833,  had  been  the  only  weekly  organ  in  the  English 
language,  for  the  Lutheran  Church,  in  the  East.  The 
spirit  in  which  it  was  conducted  at  that  time,  by  its  editor- 
in-chief.  Dr.  Benjamin  Kurtz,  was  an  offense  to  many,  on 
account  of  its  hostility  to  the  confessions  of  the  Evangel- 
ical Lutheran  Church,  whose  name  it  bore  and  whose 
interests  it  claimed  to  serve.  (See  Vol.  I,  p.  344.)  For 
some  time  a  change  in  its  management  had  been  desired 
and  urged  by  earnest  leading  men  in  the  Church.  Several 
years  before  the  Lutheran  was  established  such  a  change 
seemed  to  be  in  sight.  In  January,  1858,  Dr.  G.  Diehl, 
of  Frederick,  Maryland,  had  written  to  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth : 
"The  paper  will  now  be  in  our  own  hands.  We  will  be 
untrammelled.  You  need  have  no  fears  about  any 
further  influence  from  Dr.  Kurtz.  You  can  at  once  send 
us  anything  you  may  wish  to  give  us,  assured  that  the 
reign  of  the  dictator  is  at  an  end."  But  those  hopes 
were  premature.  Dr.  Kurtz  continued  to  rule  the 
Observer. 

Dr.  Diehl  retired  from  the  editorial  chair.  Dr.  Kurtz 
resumed  his  official  connection  with  the  paper  as  "cor- 
responding editor."  Dr.  Krauth  rather  welcomed  him 
back  to  his  place,  to  which,  he  said, 

he  is  entitled.  He  made  the  paper,  gave  it  the  impress  of 
his  own  strong  character,  and  so  fixed  its  metes  and 
bounds,  that,  even  during  his  absence  from  it,  it  could  not 
essentially  pass  out  of  them.  He  is  a  man  of  marked 
character,  with  an  ability,  first  to  know  what  he  means, 

....  and    secondly,    to    say    what    he    means 

Whether  a  man's  position  be,  in  our  judgment,  right  or 
wrong,  we  like  to  know  what  it  is.  If  we  are  to  have 
definite  platformism,  a  low  standard  of  ministerial  educa- 
tion, elective  affinity,  anxious  benches,  noise  in  meetings, 
women  making  prayer  in  public,  denunciation  of  the 
doctrines  and  usages  of  the  Church,  we  wish  them  to  be 


1861-67.]        DR.  KURTZ  AN  HONEST  RADICAL.  31 

sustained  by  somebody  who  will  not  mince  matters,  by 
somebody  who  is  not  afraid  of  the  inferences  from  his 
premises,  but  accepts  the  results  of  his  own  logic;  and 
such  a  man  is  Dr.  Kurtz.  He  is  the  leader  in  the  extrem- 
est  un-Lutheranism  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  America, 
and  his  connection  with  the  Observer  will  determine  its 
entire  effective  character.  The  other  editors,  (Drs. 
Anspach  and  T.  Stork)  will  simply  help  to  extend  the 
sphere  of  his  influence.  Their  conservatism  will  only 
serve  to  mask  the  battery  of  his  avowed  and  uncompro- 
mising radicalism,  and  help  to  bring  within  its  range 
those    who    would    otherwise    refuse    to    approach    it. 

(March  i,  1861.) 
The  Observer,  under  the  leadership  of  Dr.  Kurtz, 
acknowledges  throughout  that  the  Lutheranism  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  the  Lutheranism  of  Luther,  Arndt, 
Gerhardt,  Spener  and  Francke,  and  of  all  the  glorious 
luminaries  of  our  Church,  the  Lutheranism  which  the 
heroes  of  our  faith  confessed,  and  for  which  our  martyrs 
died,  the  Lutheranism  which  was  brought  to  these  shores 
by  our  fathers  and  planted  by  them  amid  the  perils  of 
the  wilderness — in  a  word,  that  the  Lutheranism  of  all 
history  is  not  its  Lutheranism.  All  that  Lutheranism  is 
formalism,  symbolism, — carnal,  Romanistic,  effete.  The 
most  serious  offense  that  a  man  or  a  paper  can  commit, 
in  the  eyes  of  its  Lutheranism,  is  to  refuse  to  look  upon 
the  hallowed  faith  of  the  Church,  the  faith  which  gave 

her  her  name,  as  if  it  were  old  wives'  fables This 

attitude  of  the  Observer,  Dr.  Krauth  holds,  "is  not  on 
the  true  basis  of  the  General  Synod,"  w^hile  he  claims  for 
his  own  Lutheran  that  it  stands  on  that  basis  as  defined 
by  the  constitution  and  the  acts  of  the  General  Synod. 
We  shall  defend  the  doctrines  it  confesses  to  be  those  of 
the  Bible  and  of  our  Church,  not  striving  to  ignore  the 
fundamental  character  of  those  doctrines  of  God's  Word 
which  our  Church  has  always  acknowledged  to  be  funda- 
mental, nor  to  make  fundamental  what  she  has  always 
denied  to  be  such.  We  shall  strive  to  strengthen  the 
historical    connection    which    our    General    Synod    has 


32  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XL 

acknowledged  to  be  the  origin  of  its  own  life  and  the  life 
of  our  whole  church  in  the  land.  We  shall  endeavour  in 
the  true  spirit  of  our  General  Synod,  to  rise  above  all 
partisan  and  local  modes  of  regarding  the  interests  of  our 
Church.  We  shall  know  no  German  Lutheranism  as  an 
isolated  interest,  and  no  Anti-German  Lutheranism  in  its 
false  appeals  to  the  self-conceit  of  an  illicit  nationality. 
We  shall  defend  American  Lutheranism  heart  and  soul  so 
far  as  it  involves  the  right  of  our  Church  in  this  land  to 
determine,  in  her  independence  and  by  her  own  true 
genius,  everything  which  is  not  essential  to  Lutheranism ; 
and  we  shall  oppose  ourselves  heart  and  soul  to  everything^ 
which,  under  the  name  of  American  Lutheranism,  pre- 
supposes that  our  Church  in  this  land  is  to  be  a  new  sect, 
with  new  doctrines  and  new  principles,  and  with  nothing 
of  the  old  but  the  name.  We  shall  maintain  that  the 
Lutheran  Church  of  our  Western  World  is  the  old  Church 
evolving  a  new  life,  and  our  prayer  shall  be  that  the 
Church  in  this  country  may  not  be  less  Lutheran  than  in 
the  Old  World,  but  very  much  more  so.  And  this  we 
believe  to  be  the  true  position  of  our  General   Synod. 

(September  7,  i860.) 

Meanwhile  the  dissatisfaction  in  the  Church  with  the 
Lutheran  Observer,  and  her  interest  in  the  battle  between 
"The  Lutheran  and  the  Un-Lutheran"  constantly 
increased. 

Even  the  West  Pennsylvania  Synod,  at  its  meeting  in 
Mechanicsburg,  Pa.,  September,  1861,  passed  a  preamble 
and  resolution,  severely  reflecting  on  the  management  of 
the  Lutheran  Observer.  A  call  was  issued  for  a  con- 
vention in  Baltimore,  October,  1861,  for  the  purpose  of 
forming  an  "Association  for  publishing  a  Lutheran 
Church  Paper  on  the  liberal  basis  of  the  General  Synod." 

The  friends  of  the  Observer  fully  realized  the  danger 
threatening  the  traditional  organ  of  the  General  Synod 
in  the  formidable  rivalry  of  the  Lutheran  and  the  Associa- 
tion which  had  been  formed  by  the  Conservatives  for  its- 


1861-67.]     CONSERVATIVE   AND   CONCILIATORY.  33 

publication.  And  yet,  the  excellent  character  of  the  new 
paper  made  such  an  impression  that  even  a  prominent 
member  of  the  editorial  staff  of  the  Observer  could  not 
resist  the  temptation  of  taking  "stock"  in  the  issue.  On 
October  28,  1861,  Dr.  G.  Diehl  writes  to  Dr.  S.  S. 
Schmucker : 

Heretofore  the  Observer  has  had  two  feeble  rivals 
owned  by  individuals,  now  it  will  have  a  powerful  rival, 
the  property  of  an  Association  with  ramifications  in  every 
section  of  the  Church,  and  the  keenest,  wittiest  man 
among  us  as  editor.  With  his  satire  and  playful  wit  and 
immense  resources  Charlie  will  take  so  much  fun  at  the 
editor  of  a  rival  paper  that  a  sensitive  man  will  scarcely 
be  able  to  bear  it.  Unless  a  powerful  combination,  includ- 
ing all  our  best  writers  (non-symbolical)  can  be  found  to 
supply  editorial  material  for  the  Observer,  the  old  paper 
will  stand  no  chance.  After  all,  genius  and  power  carry 
the  day.  It  is  not  so  much  doctrines  and  measures  as 
talent.  If  Charles  can  win  the  eclat  of  being  the  spiciest 
and  most  delightful  editor,  the  objections  to  his  Symbol- 
ism will  give  way  before  the  charm  of  his  literary  accom- 
plishments. 

And  again  (November  21,  1861)  : 

The  Lutheran  and  Missionary  came  to  hand  upon  a 
much  more  liberal  basis  than  I  expected.  Indeed  it  is  so 
conservative  that  Low  Church  Lutherans  can  support  it. 
It  is  so  excellent  in  its  literary  character  and  conciliatory 
spirit  that  I  was  greatly  pleased  with  it.  I  therefore  have 
taken  one  share  of  stock. 

The  plan  was  to  form  a  joint  stock  company  to  pur- 
chase the  Lutheran  Observer. 

But  the  conservative  wing  in  the  General  Synod,  being 
convinced  that  "an  antidote"  to  the  Observer  was  an 
urgent  and  immediate  necessity  for  the  Church,  had  not 
been  idle  during  the  past  months.  In  June,  1861,  a 
confidential  circular  had  been  issued,  submitting  the  draft 
3 


34  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XI. 

of  a  constitution  for  the  "Lutheran  Association  for 
Newspaper  and  Periodical  Pubhcation."  Such  an  asso- 
ciation was  promptly  organized  with  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss  as 
Chairman  of  the  Executive  Committee,  and  Henry 
KnaufT  as  Treasurer.  Satisfactory  arrangements  were 
made  for  a  union  of  the  three  papers,  the  Missionary,  the 
Lutheran,  and  the  Olive  Branch.  On  Reformation  Day, 
October  31,  1861,  the  first  number  of  the  Lutheran  and 
Missionary  appeared,  with  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth  as  General 
Editor,  and  Rev.  W.  A.  Passavant,  of  Pittsburgh,  as 
Co-Editor.     Its  programme  was  announced  as  follows  : 

The  Paper  will  be  independent  and  decided,  but  con- 
ciliatory, outspoken  on  topics  of  importance,  moderate, 
but  impartial  in  criticism,  and  sacredly  avoiding  all 
obtrusion  on  the  sphere  of  private  life  and  of  private 
character.  It  will  have  a  due  regard  to  honest  differences 
of  opinion  among  those  who  love  the  Church,  and  will 
strive  to  present  a  common  ground  on  which  our  best 
men  can  meet  for  fraternal  comparison  of  views.  It  will 
aim  at  creating  more  and  more  among  our  ministers  and 
people,  a  profound  love  and  reverence  for  the  Word  of 
God  as  the  sole  rule  of  faith  and  of  life,  and  to  diffuse  a 
knowledge  of  its  teachings.  It  will  set  forth,  and  when 
necessary,  defend,  those  scriptural  principles  which 
created  the  Reformation  and  gave  character  to  the  Evan- 
gelical Lutheran  Church,  and  separating  the  merely  inci- 
dental, local  and  non-essential  from  what  is. unchangeable 
and  fundamental  in  her  doctrines,  usages  and  life,  will 
"earnestly  contend  for  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints,"  and  will  "speak  the  truth  in  love." 

It  will  faithfully  devote  itself  to  the  interests  of  the 
whole  Lutheran  Church  in  America,  recognizing 
neither  locality  nor  language,  as  a  reason  for  narrowing 
its  sympathies.  It  will  strive  to  rise  above  every  species 
of  partisanship,  and  will  earnestly  labor  for  the  purity 
and  true  peace  of  Zion.  It  will  give  special  prominence 
to  the  great  Evangelical  doctrines  of  salvation  by  grace, 


1861-67.]  PROGRAMME  OF  "  THE  LUTHERAN."  35 

the  necessity  of  regeneration,  and  of  a  holy  living  as  the 
fruit  of  faith.  It  will  array  itself  alike  against  the  error 
which  substitutes  the  form  for  the  power  of  godliness, 
and  the  fanaticism  which  mistakes  justification  by  sensa- 
tion for  justification  by  faith.  It  will  aim  to  arouse 
pastor  and  people  constantly  to  seek  the  reviving  influ- 
ences of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  faithfully  to  use  God's 
appointed  means  to  secure  them,  and  will  present  ample 
accounts  of  the  special  evidences  which  the  Head  of  the 
Church  may  give,  that  the  prayers  and  toils  of  those  who 
labor  for  her  good  are  not  in  vain.  It  \yill  heartily 
sustain  the  General  Synod  in  all  its  efforts  to  unite  and 
strengthen  our  beloved  Church. 

From  the  best  books,  periodicals,  and  newspapers  of 
England,  America  and  Germany,  it  will  cull  whatever, 
especially  in  religious  literature  or  intelligence,  is  best 
adapted  to  interest  and  benefit  its  readers.  It  will  look 
to  the  wants  of  the  Home,  of  parents  and  of  children,  to 
the  interests  of  the  Sunday-school,  of  Missions,  of  Educa- 
tion, of  Church  Extension,  of  our  Literary,  Theological 
and  Benevolent  Institutions,  and  will  sustain  all  measures 
however  old  or  however  new  which  have  their  warrant 
in  the  letter  or  spirit  of  God's  Word.  By  a  large  corre- 
spondence it  will  be  able  to  present  ample  and  fresh 
intelligence  from  every  part  of  the  Church.  Special 
regard  will  be  had  to  the  wants  and  interests  of  the 
German  part  of  the  Churches,  and  the  great  West  will 
have  a  place  worthy  of  its  importance. 

The  attitude  of  the  paper  with  regard  to  the  conflict 
that  was  agitating  the  Lutheran  Church  is  more  fully  set 
forth  in  the  following  editorial : 

WHERE  DO  WE  STAND? 

Not  as  the  representative  of  a  party.  We  shall  labor 
to  redeem  the  Church  from  partisanship  of  every  kind. 
Our  columns  shall  be  open  to  thoughtful  men  of  every 
shade  of  opinion,  which  is  not  in  conflict  with  the  funda- 
mentals of  Evangelical  Orthodoxy.     Our  aim  shall  be  to 


36  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XI. 

judge  of  every  question  on  its  own  merits  without  refer- 
ence to  the  interests  of  any  party,  and  we  hope  to  secure 
the  approval  of  men  who  may  dififer  widely  on  some 
points,  but  who  concur  in  loving  honesty,  candor,  and 
impartiality. 

We  are  not  "old  Lutherans."  If  there  be  a  Lutheran- 
ism  which  is  exclusive,  harsh  and  repellant,  ....  which 
cannot  discriminate  between  essence  and  accident,  between 
truth  and  her  clothes,  which  holds  to  what  has  been, 
simply  because  it  has  been,  and  regards  novelty  as  the 
only  unpardonable  sin,  which  refuses  all  change,  and 
would  die  rather  than  submit  to  any  adaptation,  that  is 
not  our  Lutheranism.  The  Lutheranism  we  have 
learned  to  love  is  moderate  in  its  tone,  free  from  the 
spirit  of  a  false  exclusiveness,  and  makes  no  pretensions 
which  have  any  show  of  extravagance.  We  do  not 
claim  that  the  Lutheran  Church  is  the  Church  universal. 
We  do  claim  that  she  is  a  part  of  it,  pure  in  her  genuine 
doctrines,  earnest  in  her  genuine  life,  uniting  conservat- 
ism with  ardour;  a  quiet,  unpretending,  yet  great,  and 
useful  and  beneficent  church,  whose  living  members  love 
their  Saviour  with  their  whole  heart,  and  have  the  witness 
and  assurance  in  themselves  that  they  are  loved  by  Him. 
But  with  this  we  acknowledge  the  Christian  character  of 
the  true  disciples  of  our  Lord  throughout  the  world. 
....  We  contend  for  a  unity  which  rests  on  the  com- 
mon recognition  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the 
gospel,  and  a  concurrence  in  the  divine  essentials  of  the 
administration  of  the  sacraments.  For  those  that  are  at 
war  with  us,  even  as  regards  these,  we  have  charity — for 
those  that  are  one  with  us  in  these  we  have  the  most 
hearty  acknowledgment  of  Christian  fraternity.  We 
believe  genuine  Lutheranism  to  be  the  least  exclusive  of 
systems — the  system  which  most  happily  harmonizes  the 
steadfast  confession  of  what  God  has  fixed,  with  the  most 
perfect  liberty  in  what  God  has  left  free.  We  will  not 
consent  to  abandon  these  great  principles.  If  the  effort 
thus  to  dwarf  our  Church  should  take  the  old  and  hallowed 
name  upon  it,  we  shall  not  be  deluded  by  the  mere  sound. 


1861-67.]     THE  PASSING  AND  THE  PERMANENT.  37 

If  the  effort  to  sectarianize  our  Church  calls  itself  *'old 
Lutheranism"  we  are  not  old  Lutherans, 

Atid  yet  we  are  Old  Lutherans.  We  love  the  old 
doctrines — a  great  deal  older  are  they  than  the  Reforma- 
tion— older  than  time — old  as  the  infinite  mind  in  which 
they  dwelt  from  eternity.  The  fact  that  our  fathers 
revived  them  does  not  make  the  doctrines  or  our  fathers 
less  dear  to  us.  We  love  the  ancient  life  in  its  simplicity 
and  earnestness,  its  childlike  devotion,  its  tender  trust — 
the  dear  old  hymns  that  have  spoken  to  the  hearts  of  many 
generations,  the  spirit  of  the  old  worship,  the  principles 
that  underlie  the  essential  usages  of  our  Church.  In  its 
own  time  and  place  and  surroundings,  there  is  nothing 
in  the  whole  historic  life  of  our  Church  that  repels  us. 
Our  parent  tree  may  shed  its  foliage,  to  renew  it,  or  its 
blossoms  may  fall  off  to  give  way  to  fruit,  parasitic 
creepers  may  be  torn  from  it,  storms  may  carry  away  a 
dead  branch  here  and  there — but  there  is  not  strength 
enough  in  hell  and  earth  combined  to  break  its  massive 
trunk.  Till  the  new  earth  comes,  that  grand  old  tree, 
undecaying,  will  strike  its  roots  deeper  in  the  earth  that  is, 
till  the  new  heavens  arch  themselves,  it  will  lift  itself 
under  these  skies,  and  wave  in  tempest  and  sunshine,  its 
glorious  boughs. 

We  are  "American  Lutherans."  We  accept  the  great 
fact  that  God  has  established  our  Zion  in  this  western 
world  under  circumstances  wholly  different  from  those  m 
which  her  past  life  has  been  nurtured.  New  forms  of 
duty,  new  types  of  thought,  new  necessities  of  adaptation, 
are  here  to  tax  all  her  strength,  and  to  test  how  far  she  is 
able  to  maintain  her  vital  power  under  necessary  changes 
of  form.  The  Lutheranism  of  this  country  cannot  be  a 
mere  feeble  echo  of  any  nationalized  species  of  Lutheran- 
ism. It  cannot  be  permanently  German  or  Scandinavian, 
out  of  Germany  and  Scandinavia,  but  in  America  must  be 
American.  It  must  be  conformed  in  accordance  with  its 
own  principles  to  its  new  home,  bringing  hither  its  price- 
less experiences  in  the  old  world,  to  apply  them  to  the 
living  present  in  the  new.     Our  Church  must  be  pervaded 


38  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XI. 

by  sympathy  for  this  land;  she  must  learn  in  order  that 
she  may  teach.  She  must  not  be  afraid  to  trust  herself 
on  this  wild  current  of  the  quick  life  of  America.  She 
must  not  cloister  herself,  but  show  in  her  freedom,  and 
in  her  wise  use  of  the  opportunity  of  the  present,  that 
she  knows  how  robust  is  her  spiritual  life,  and  how 
secure  are  her  principles,  however  novel  or  trying  the 
tests  to  which  they  are  subjected.  In  the  right  use  of  the 
term  we  glory  in  being  American  Lutherans. 

And  yet,  we  are  not  American  Lutherans,  if  to  be  such, 
means  that  we  are  to  have  a  new  faith,  a  mutilated  con- 
fession, a  life  which  abruptly  breaks  with  all  our  history, 
a  spirit  alien  to  that  of  the  genuine  Lutheranism  of  the 
past.  An  American  Lutheran  Church,  which  has  no 
right  to  claim  as  a  part  of  its  heritage  the  immortal 
names,  and  holy  memories  of  the  past,  a  new  sect  in  this 
land  of  sects — God  save  us  from  this. 

Lutheranism  is  neither  a  speculation  nor  an  experi- 
ment, but  an  established  life.  It  is  a  genuine  Chris- 
tianity, and  at  its  heart  we  caught  the  first  life-pulse  of 
our  own.  If  to  be  Evangelical  Lutheran,  for  this, 
without  reservation,  we  confess  ourselves  to  be,  is  fatal 
to  our  hopes  of  winning  a  way  to  the  hearts  of  those  who 
bear  the  same  name  with  us,  if  to  be  what  we  call  our- 
selves, is  a  crime,  then  our  way  is  made  thorny  with  those 
with  whom  we  desire  to  walk  in  love.  If  to  prefer 
Jerusalem  above  our  chief  joy  may  not  be  forgiven,  then 
must  the  blow  fall  upon  us.  But  we  fear  no  repulse,  no 
stroke  of  anger  from  those  who  love  Zion.  We  ask 
them  to  labor  with  us  for  her  purity,  her  peace,  her  pros- 
perity. Where  we  cannot  see  eye  to  eye  with  them,  we 
beg  them  to  bear  with  us,  as  we  shall  most  gladly  bear 
with  them.  Let  us  mingle  our  prayers  for  more  light, 
more  love,  more  earnestness — for  a  larger  measure  of  the 
baptism  of  the  Spirit  of  our  God.  On  one  point  all 
Christian  hearts  beat  together.  It  is  in  the  desire  for  the 
unity  of  the  Church  universal.  Let  us  begin  with  our 
own.  The  largest  contribution  we  can  make  to  Christian 
unity  is  to  secure  it  among  ourselves.     Brethren !  toward 


1861-67.]  THE  CHURCH  DEMANDS   UNITY.  39 

whom  our  hearts  have  yearned  only  the  more  fondly,  as 
we  have  seen  misapprehension  breeding  doubt,  coldness, 
and  distrust,  we  must  not  stand  aloof  from  each  other  in 
the  great  work  of  our  Lord.  The  Church  demands  our 
unity — souls  that  are  perishing  cry  out  for  it ;  we  must  be 
one.  The  worst  of  heresies  is  hard,  suspicious  and 
unloving  hearts,  among  those  that  should  be  brethren. 
Let  us  put  the  points  on  which  we  may  differ  into  the 
crucible  of  experience,  and  let  that  which  produces  the 
purest  love,  the  meekest,  lowliest  and  most  steadfast  piety, 
the  most  active  and  abiding  effort  for  good,  be  accepted 
as  fine  gold.  In  this  fire  the  true  test  is  made,  and  only 
he  who  suspects  that  he  is  building  with  hay,  wood,  and 
stubble  fears  the  trial. 

Dr.  Krauth  himself  had  not  been  particularly  anxious 
to  undertake  the  editorship  of  the  new  paper.  Other 
men,  like  Dr.  W.  M.  Reynolds,  and  Dr.  Theophilus 
Stork,  showed  much  more  ambition  for  that  post,  and 
were  more  or  less  disappointed  when  the  place  was  not 
offered  to  them.  But  the  Committee  which  selected  Dr. 
C.  P.  Krauth,  was,  as  his  father  writes,  ''very  urgent, 
gave  him  carte  blanche,  left  him  free  to  determine  his 
pastoral  relations.  He  finally  concluded  to  accept  and 
devote  himself  entirely  to  the  work."  (Letter  to  Dr.  H. 
I.  Schmidt,  November  7.  1861.)  Before  coming  to  a 
decision  he  had  conscientiously  considered  the  important 
step  he  was  expected  to  take,  and  had  fully  counted  the 
cost.  The  following  article,  written  about  a  year  after 
the  first  appearance  of  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary, 
gives  us  an  insight  into  his  personal  reasonings  and 
experiences  in  making  the  transition  from  the  position  of 
the  pastor  to  that  of  the  editor : 

EDITOR  AND  PREACHER. 

Who  has  the  more  laborious  life, — the  editor  or  the 
preacher?  If  we  are  to  settle  the  question  by  our  own 
experience,  we  would  reply  the  editor  has.     Entering  the 


40  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XL 

ministry  young  and  pursuing  its  work  steadily,  in  posi- 
tions, and  surrounded  by  circumstances,  which  gave  us 
an  opportunity  of  fairly  testing  its  laboriousness,  we 
think  we  know  pretty  well  what  is  its  measure  of  toil. 
In  the  ministry  we  had  at  various  times  engagements  not 
directly  connected  with  our  pastoral  vocation.  With 
very  little  original  disposition  to  write  for  the  press,  we 
have  been  drawn  in  to  write  a  good  deal.  We  have  been 
a  contributor  to  the  Reviezv  of  our  Church,  a  pamph- 
leteer, have  translated  a  large  and  somewhat  difficult 
work  from  the  German,  and  have  edited  a  Vocabulary  of 
Philosophy.  We  did  a  good  deal  of  work  for  the 
Missionary  in  its  early  life  as  a  weekly,  and  when  the 
Quarto  Lutheran  was  started,  came  to  be  recognized  as 
a  sort  of  editor  of  it,  on  the  strength  of  the  fact  that  our 
lucubrations  were  set  up  in  lead  where  the  editorial  ought 
to  have  been. 

Throughout  these  labors,  which  men  of  the  quill  know 
not  to  have  been  light,  we  have  endeavored  to  perform 
the  pulpit  and  pastoral  duties  required  by  large  and  intel- 
ligent congregations.  We  think  we  may  say  in  all  good 
conscience,  that,  although  we  took  from  the  hours  of  rest 
and  of  recreation  what  ought  to  have  been  given  to  them, 
we  never  took  from  our  people  the  time  which  belonged 
to  them.  If  we  did  them  wrong  it  was  in  this  way,  that 
excess  of  labor  deprived  us  of  the  elasticity  and  freshness 
which  we  ought  to  have  brought  to  our  work. 

Our  ministry  commences  with  our  boyhood.  Our  first 
efifort  at  preaching  was  made  at  the  age  of  seventeen. 
We  were  licensed  at  eighteen,  and  shortly  after  organized 
our  first  congregation.  At  nineteen  we  were  ordained, 
and  are  now  in  the  twenty-second  year  of  our  ministry. 
Out  of  these  twenty-one  years  the  last  has  been  the  most 
laborious. 

It  is  true  that  we  have  voluntarily,  in  some  sense, 
enlarged  its  toils.  We  preach  more  Sundays  in  the  year 
than  when  we  were  in  the  pastoral  work.  The  editor  is 
a  convenience  for  brethren  when  they  go  to  the  seaside, 
the  mountain  and  the  lakes.     Our  engagements  often  run 


1861-67.]  EDITOR  OR  PREACHER  .'  4 1 

in  advance  without  a  break  for  more  than  a  month.  Par- 
ticular engagements  reach  forward  several  months.  We 
say,  this,  in  some  sense,  enlarges  our  toils,  but  not,  we 
thank  God,  in  every  sense.  No  matter  how  weary  we 
may  feel  on  Saturday  night,  we  cannot  be  happy  on  the 
day  of  our  Lord  unless  we  are  permitted  to  speak  for 
Him.  It  is  a  privilege  to  plead  for  Christ.  We  used 
to  envy  those  who  could  constantly  hear  preaching,  and 
we  rejoice  now  that  we  can  sit  under  the  sound  of  the 
Gospel  more  frequently  than  we  formerly  could.  But 
we  have  found  here,  as  everywhere,  that  "it  is  more 
blessed  to  give  than  to  receive."  Happy  is  the  man  who 
is  allowed  to  give  his  whole  heart  and  soul  to  the  direct 
work  of  the  ministry.  He  who  runs  from  the  ministry 
into  any  other  work,  without  the  clear  call  of  God,  is 
indeed  to  be  pitied. 

While,  however,  editing  is  more  laborious  than  the 
pastoral  work,  the  labor  is  more  diversified,  the  strain  is 
not  so  steady  on  one  set  of  muscles.  It  is  said  that  a 
horse  can  go  further  in  a  day  and  with  less  fatigue,  over 
a  rolling  country,  than  over  a  dead  level.  Even  the 
special  troubles  of  an  editor,  if  he  takes  them  in  the 
right  way,  help  to  freshen  him.  He  gets  a  larger  variety 
of  sensations  than  a  pastor  does,  and  the  disagreeable 
ones  are  the  second  layer  in  the  cameo  of  his  life.  No 
man  can  be  at  once  comfortable  and  true  to  duty  in  his 
life  unless  he  loves  work.  Without  this  love  he  will  be 
unhappy  anywhere. — and  with  it  he  can  learn,  even  as  an 
editor,  to  be  content  with  his  estate.  (November  20, 
1862.) 

What  moved  him.  above  all  things,  to  undertake  the 
laborious  and  responsible  work  of  the  editor  was  the  deep 
conviction  of  the  pressing  need  of  the  Church  in  this 
field.  In  one  of  the  first  numbers  of  the  semi-monthly 
Lutheran,  before  its  union  with  the  Missionary,  he 
expresses  his  mind  on  this  subject  in  the  following 
article.      (September  21,  i860.) 


42  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XL 

THE   LUTHERAN    CHURCH    AND   HER   NEWSPAPER   LITERA- 
TURE. 

It  might  have  been  supposed  that  the  Church,  which  is 
the  mother  of  modern  freedom,  would,  in  this  land  of 
the  free,  see  her  halcyon  days.  To  what  are  we  to 
attribute  it,  that  trials,  hardly  second  to  those  of  direct 
persecution,  have  assailed  her  here?  She  encourrtered, 
at  her  entrance  on  this  western  world,  the  difficulty  con- 
nected with  the  diversity  of  language.  The  song  of 
Zion  was  to  be  sung  in  a  strange  land — where  its  sweet- 
est utterances  seemed  a  jargon  and  a  babbling.  They 
could  not  understand  her  testimony;  they  knew  not  of 
her  rich  literature,  and  of  her  glorious  history;  and 
when  the  poor  German  tried,  in  soul-deep  utterances,  to- 
show  that  he  had  the  same  faith  as  Christ's  people  around 
him,  they  forgot  the  faith,  and  laughed  at  the  broken 
utterances  of  his  unhabituated  lips.  He  knew  his  mother 
tongue  too  well  to  be  laughed  out  of  the  heritage  it 
brought  him,  and  clung  to  it  with  a  tenacity,  religious, 
and  sometimes  almost  fanatical.  One  national  life  was 
to  pass  over  into  another;  the  warm-hearted,  simple- 
minded  German  was  to  be  shaped  in  the  mould  of  a 
harder  national  type.  Our  nation  is  not  specially  endowed 
with  the  faculty  of  entering  into  the  peculiarities  of 
others,  and  doing  them  justice.  We  have  too  determined 
a  disposition  to  think  well  of  ourselves,  to  be  deterred 
from  doing  it  by  so  trifling  a  consideration  as,  that  it  is 
done  at  the  expense  of  others.  Many  of  the  German 
emigrants  were  poor,  depending  on  their  own  toil,  and 
by  natural  consequence,  in  perpetual  danger  of  becoming- 
absorbed  in  purely  material  interests.  In  a  land  of  great 
personal  freedom,  and  among  a  population  divided  as 
infinitely  as  sectarian  ingenuity  can  rend  it,  the  people  of 
our  Church  shared,  in  common  with  others,  the  perils 
connected  with  the  abuse  of  liberty  and  the  tendencies  to> 
factious  division.  Various  causes,  which  we  have  not 
room  to  detail  here,  made  her  supply  of  ministers  wholly 
inadequate.     Never  was  there  such  a  harvest  with  so  few 


1861-67.J  GROWING   OUR  EXPERIENCE.  43 

laborers.  It  took  a  strong  constitution  to  bear  such  an 
acclimation  as  she  was  called  to  pass  through ;  but  she 
still  not  only  breathes,  she  lives. 

The  first  effect  of  those  great  movements  of  Provi- 
dence which  have  opened  the  way  to  the  supply  of  her 
wants,  has  been  a  keener  and  more  painful  consciousness 
of  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  wants.  It  is  only  when 
we  begin  to  revive  from  a  stupor,  that  we  are  conscious 
of  having  passed  through  it.  The  convalescent  com- 
plains of  his  weakness,  and  the  cicatrizing  sore  annoys. 
The  very  querulousness  which  sometimes  manifests  itself 
in  our  midst  is  hopeful.  The  very  absurdity  of  some  of 
the  longings  which  reveal  themselves,  show  that  the 
Church  begins  to  feel  her  wants.  It  may  be  exceedingly 
foolish  in  the  invalid  who  is  barely  allowed  a  little 
chicken-broth  to  insist  on  being  promoted  straightway  to 
beef-steak  and  mutton-chops;  but  the  physician,  who 
hears  his  demand,  smiles  hopefully,  for  he  knows  that  a 
good  appetite  is  a  good  sign,  imperious  and  impatient 
though  it  may  be.  It  is  to  us  a  most  happy  token  of 
good  that  our  Church  is  getting  so  inordinate  in  her 
desire  for  all  sorts  of  good  things,  for  although  wishing 
for  them  does  not  in  itself  bring  them,  they  never  do  come 
till  they  are  wished  for.  This  is  wishing  time  in  our 
Church.  The  blossoms  are  begging  for  sunlight,  and  the 
tender  grass  implores  the  shower.  We  do  not  despair 
because  we  see  around  us  so  many  beginnings  of  things. 
No  church  learns  by  the  experience  of  another.  We 
cannot  begin  where  other  denominations  leave  off.  We 
have  to  grow  our  experience  from  the  beginning,  and  the 
root  of  all  invention,  and  of  all  progress,  is  the  sense  of 
necessity.  This  we  are  getting.  It  does  not  seem  much, 
we  confess,  but  it  is  the  point  from  which  we  must 
start.  Look  at  the  contented  limitation  of  our  Church 
even  twenty-five  years  ago.  The  man  who  would  then 
have  said  the  things  might  be,  which  the  most  sober  in 
our  Church  now  say  must  be,  would  have  been  considered 
a  dreamer.  The  man  who  would  have  affirmed  that 
much  could  be  which  now  actually  is,  would  have  been 


44  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XI. 

suspected  as  an  enthusiast.  The  friends  of  the  General 
Synod  in  their  defense  of  it  against  the  allegation  that  it 
might  become  a  tyrannical  power,  appealed  to  its 
numerical  insignificance  to  show  how  ridiculous  such 
fears  were,  and  the  appeal  implied  that  it  was  not  prob- 
able that  it  ever  could  be  a  great  body.  Now  we  are 
rising  to  the  happy  impatience  connected  with  the  most 
sanguine  anticipation,  and  we  are  full  of  wants. 

Our  wants — where  shall  we  begin?  More  fields  for 
our  foreign  missionaries,  and  more  missionaries  for  our 
fields;  a  fuller  supply  of  the  wants  of  the  heathendom  in 
our  Christendom ;  men  for  the  West ;  men  for  the 
South ;  men  for  the  foreign  emigrant,  and  men  for  the 
home  emigrant;  men  to  turn  into  the  channel  of  the 
river  of  God  the  stream  from  the  old  States  to  the  new. 
We  want  more  churches  and  more  preachers ;  more  educa- 
tion among  our  people  and  our  ministers ;  more  bene- 
ficiaries on  our  funds,  and  more  funds  for  our  bene- 
ficiaries; more  asylums  for  the  friendless,  and  sick,  and 
sorrowing  of  earth,  and  a  deeper  interest  in  those  already 
formed,  and  a  more  systematic  support  of  them.  We 
want  more  thought  fulness,  more  love,  more  earnestness 
in  willing,  and  more  persistence  in  working.  We  want 
more  of  the  order  of  law  in  our  government,  and  more 
of  the  spirit  of  the  gospel  in  all  our  relations.  We  want 
to  be  a  stronger  church,  a  more  active  church,  a  more 
holy  church. 

But  before  our  Church  can  develop  her  strength,  her 
children  must  know  her  well  enough  to  love  her;  yes, 
and  with  a  child-like  heart,  to  be  proud  of  her.  She  has 
been  slandered,  as  though  she  taught  her  children  the 
very  things  which  wring  her  heart.  Making,  herself,  no 
efforts  to  proselyte,  she  has  been  the  victim  of  a  thousand. 
And,  alas!  some  of  her  children,  even  some  who  used 
to  brand  the  falsehoods  circulated  against  her,  now  seem 
to  endorse  them  and  to  invent  new  charges,  charges 
which  even  her  foes  never  brought  against  her.  We 
need  light — a  true  Lutheran  literature — and  literature 
must  begin  to  build  at  the  bottom.     The  least  pretending 


1861-67.]  THE  IDEAL  CHURCH-PAPER.  45 

form  in  which  it  can  come,  is  that  in  which  it  is  most 
needed — first  of  all,  the  Newspaper.  Papers,  indeed,  we 
have — some  of  them  excellent  in  their  kind.  But  some, 
even  of  these,  are  limited  in  their  influence  by  the 
language  in  which  they  are  issued,  some  by  the  disad- 
vantages of  locality,  and  some  by  want  of  sufficiently 
large  construction  of  the  real  need  of  the  Church. 

If  we  could  have  a  paper  which  fairly  represented  the 
highest  spirit  of  our  Church,  faithful  to  her  freedom  and 
her  purity ;  not  false  to  her  doctrines,  and  yet  true  to  her 
practical  and  spiritual  life;  addressing  itself  to  the  wants 
of  our  people,  but  not  perpetuating  prejudices  by  pander- 
ing to  them ;  could  we  have  such  a  paper,  meeting  the 
support  it  deserves,  would  it  not  be  the  harbinger  of  a 
brighter  day?  Such  a  paper  would  be  faithful  to  the 
past  and  the  present ;  faithful  to  the  name  and  principles 
of  our  Church;  yet  prompt  to  teach  every  lesson  which 
time  has  brought  to  enlarge  her  experience.  It  would 
be  a  paper  of  Missions  and  Education;  of  Faith  and  of 
Mercy;  of  the  School,  the  Church,  and  the  Asylum.  Its 
columns  would  be  the  place  where  men  of  kindred  heart — 
only  drawn  more  closely  to  each  other  by  their  diversities 
in  minor  matters — would  unite  the  offerings  which  they 
hoped  might  not  prove  unacceptable  to  the  Church.  Such 
a  paper  would  be,  in  some  degree,  worthy  to  be  called  a 
Lutheran  paper,  and  to  sustain  it,  would  be  like  ordaining 
a  host  of  new  and  faithful  preachers.  Such  a  paper  we 
wish  ours  to  be,  but  nothing  on  the  one  hand  but  the 
blessing  of  God  on  unremitting  toil,  and  on  fervent 
prayer,  and  nothing  on  the  other  but  the  combination  of 
the  strength  of  many,  and  the  confidence  and  the  sustain- 
ing arm  of  the  friends  of  the  Church  can  make  it  such. 

The  important  question  whether  a  church-paper 
should  have  an  official  character,  being  issued  and  con- 
trolled by  church  authority,  or  should  be  simply  a  private 
undertaking  on  individual  responsibility,  is  considered 
by  him  in  an  article  of  October  19,  1865.  We  can 
readily  understand  that  in  those  days,  in  the  midst  of 


.6  CHARLES  PORT  ERF  lELD  KRAUT  H.     [Chap.  XI. 

the  conflict  that  was  raging  in  the  General  Synod,  his 
answer  would  naturally  be  in  opposition  to  the  official 
character  of  the  church-paper.  But,  at  the  same  time, 
he  clearly  points  out  the  great  dangers  of  irresponsible 
papers,  edited  by  private  persons  who  may  use  them  to 
exercise  a  most  pernicious  influence  in  the  Church.  The 
article  is  as  follows : 

CHURCH    PAPERS,   INDIVIDUAL  AND  OFFICIAL. 

Should  the  paper  for  the  Church  be  issued  and  con- 
trolled by  church  authority?     We  think  it  should  not. 
But,    in   avoiding   this   rock,   we   should   not   run   upon 
another.     The  Christian  people  of  a  church,  in  buildmg 
up  a  paper,  should  have  sure  guarantees  that  it  shall 
continue  to  be  that  paper  which  they  desire  to  establish. 
An  irresponsible  individualism  in  church  publications  is 
a   great   mischief    at    one    extreme,    as    positive    official 
authority  in  them,  is  a  great  evil  at  the  other.     No  paper 
bearing  the  name  of  the  Church,  and  sure  to  be  considered 
as  representing  it,  should  be  sustained,  unless  there  is 
some  well-defined  mode  of  correcting  evils  which  may  be 
connected  with  it.     There  should  be  a  covenant  as  to 
the  great  leading  principles  which  are  to  regulate  it,  and 
there  should  be  some  authority  which  should  protect  the 
patrons  of  that  paper  from  the  abuse  of  that  power  which 
time  brings  to  every  paper  which  becomes  well-estab- 
lished.    An  old  paper  is  an  Institution.     The  subscriber 
does  not  merely  pay  a  sum  for  which  he  receives  an 
immediate  equivalent,  but  he  helps  to  build  up  something 
which  will  eventually  grow  so  strong,  that  it  can  laugh 
at  his  remonstrances,  and  his  withdrawal  of  subscription. 
There  should  be  written  guarantees,  and  an  official  power 
to  enforce  them.     We  have  a  Protestant  regard  for  that 
which  is  written  and  explicit,  over  against  that  which  is 
oral   and  implicit.     The  supporters   of   a   paper  should 
know    what    is    guaranteed    them,    and    should    have    a 
thorough  assurance,  well  protected,  that  they  will  not  be 
used  as  indirect  instruments  in  building  up  what  they 
abhor,   or   in  establishing  within   the   Church   a   power 


1861-6;.]       INDIVIDUALISM  NEEDS  GUARDING. 

hostile  to  its  life.     In  every  respect  in  which  individual- 
ism has  Its  proper  play,  the  editors  and  correspondents 
ot  a  paper  should  have  the  most  absolute  liberty      Their 
utterances  should  not  be  official;  their  paper  should  not 
propose  to  be  a  new  symbolical  book;  they  should  not  be 
under  the  restraint  which  rests  upon  men  who  suppose 
that  what  they  say  commits  others.     They  are  not  to 
regard  themselves  as  editors  or  correspondents  plenipo- 
tentiary, and  should  neither  hold  themselves  responsible 
for  other  men's  sins,  nor  expect  others  to  answer  for 
theirs.     In  its  proper  province,  we  believe  individualism 
is  an  element  of  power.     But  it  must  be  well-defined  in 
Its  metes  and  bounds;   for  all  power  runs  out,   if  un- 
guarded, into  tyranny.     The  true  liberty  of  one,  respects 
the  liberty  of  the  many,  and  does  homage  to  law      A 
freedom  of  the  press  which  overrides  and  crushes  out  all 
other  freedom,  is,  in  fact,  one  of  the  worst  of  autocracies 
and  to  this  dangerous  extreme,  all  absolutely  irresponsible 
publication  tends.     The  English  papers  of  our  Church 
with    two    exceptions,    have    no    such    safeguard      The 
Lutheran  Standard,  edited  by  Rev.  M.  Loy,  is  published 
under  the  auspices  of  the  Joint  Evangelical   Lutheran 

'T,  u  °iu^^'''-  ^^^  Lutheran  and  Missionary  is 
published  by  an  association  embracing  a  large  body  of  our 
most  esteemed  ministers  and  laymen.  Its  fundamental 
principles  are  clearly  defined  in  its  constitution  The 
character  and  duties  of  all  who  take  part  in  its  manage- 
ment are  defined;  no  man,  though  he  had  the  wealth  of 
Lrc^sus  or  ot  a  speculator  in  petroleum,  can  buy  an 
editorship  in  it,  or  enlist  it  to  individual  ends  If  its 
editor  errs  in  judgment,  or  perverts  the  paper  from  its 
true  ends,  there  is  a  corporate  body  which  can  advise  and 
reform  him,  and.  if  necessary,  deprive  him  of  his  place, 
ft  the  utterly  irresponsible  papers  of  a  church,  after  win- 
ning their  way  into  the  families  of  the  church,  and 
establishing  themselves,  were  to  advocate  the  most  vital 
errors,  there  is  no  authority  which  could  throw  the  editors 
from  their  places.  Their  patrons  do  not  know  what 
they  are  establishing.     Their  editors,  being  self-elected 


48  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XI. 

simonical  autocrats,  can  remain  at  pleasure  in  these  posi- 
tions, and  wield,  as  has  actually  been  wielded,  the  influ- 
ence of  such  papers,  in  favor  of  secession  in  the  State,  of 
fanaticism  and  doctrinal  error  in  the  Church,  and  of  the 
spirit  of  private  grudge,  and  animosity,  among  ministers, 
Synods  and  Churches. 

With  all  the  courage  and  enthusiasm  that  animated  the 
men  who  had  undertaken  the  publication  of  the  Lutheran 
and  Missionary,  they  could  not  deceive  themselves  as  to 
the  great  difficulties  which  obstructed  their  path  and  made 
their  success,  for  a  time,  a  matter  of  great  anxiety  and 
uncertainty.  "The  Lutheran  is  making  its  way  slowly. 
It  has  a  hard  struggle,"  says  Dr.  Charles  Ph.  Krauth,  in 
a  letter  to  his  friend,  Dr.  H.  I.  Schmidt.  *'Can  it  live?" 
was  the  question  which  its  warmest  friends  sent  up  to 
the  sanctum  of  the  Editor.  The  paper  was  undertaken 
at  the  very  time  when  the  conflict  between  North  and 
South  reached  its  terrible  crisis  in  the  war,  which  for 
four  long  years  devastated  our  country,  and  concentrated 
all  the  interest  of  its  patriotic  citizens  on  its  bloody  fields- 
of  battle.  It  brought  an  enormous  rise  in  prices  for  the 
necessities  of  life,  and  also  for  all  material  and  labor, 
connected  with  the  printing  and  publication  of  a  paper. 
Many  of  the  oldest  and  most  widely  circulated  papers,  in 
those  days,  were  forced  to  reduce  their  size,  to  increase 
their  price,  and  to  make  themselves  more  and  more  gen- 
eral advertising  mediums,  often  in  very  questionable 
forms.  Well  might  Dr.  F.  W.  Conrad  say,  in  a  letter 
to  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth,  in  which  he  promised  to  write  for 
the  paper  and  apologized  for  his  absence  from  the  stock- 
holders' meeting:  'Tf  you  can  get  along  during  these 
war  times  with  your  heads  above  water,  you  will  be  doing 
wonders." 

Another  difficulty  which  the  Lutheran  had  to  encounter 
we  find  indicated  in  a  passage  from  a  letter  of  Dr.  Chas.. 


1861-67.]  THE"  LUTHERAN"  AND  ITS  READERS.  49 

Ph.  Krauth,  when  he  says :  "The  Lutheran  might  per- 
haps be  regarded  as  too  educated  for  our  Church,  but 
that  is,  if  a  fault,  a  very  good  one."  The  average  readers 
of  church  papers  among  the  Lutherans  of  those  days  were 
men  of  rather  modest  Hterary  culture  and  education. 
The  Church  of  immigrants  and  of  their  descendants  in  the 
first  and  second  generation,  preoccupied  with  the  struggle 
for  an  honest  living  on  the  farms  and  in  the  workshops 
of  the  country,  could  not  boast  of  any  distinction  and 
brilliancy  in  this  respect.  Her  people  were  mostly  plain 
folks,  of  an  ordinary  public  or  parish  school  training. 
And  even  those  among  them  who  were  regular  readers  of 
church  papers  had  been  thoroughly  spoiled  by  the  tone 
which  characterized  the  leading  paper,  the  Lutheran 
Observer.  There  was,  no  doubt,  a  certain  popularity  in 
its  pithy  and  drastic  manner  of  handling  its  themes.  But 
it  was  the  popularity  of  the  unprincipled  demagogue, 
whose  coarseness  and  crudities  catered  to  the  uneducated 
masses,  and  blinded  them  to  the  real  shallowness,  and 
utter  lack  of  literary  and  theological  culture  which  char- 
acterized its  leading  articles.  People  who  relished  the 
tirades  of  the  Observer  were  not  able  to  appreciate  the 
high  literary  standard  of  the  Lutheran,  its  solid  scholar- 
ship, the  width  and  comprehensiveness  of  its  horizon,  its 
fairness  and  generosity,  its  Attic  refinement,  even  in  the 
sphere  of  wit  and  humor. 

But  the  foremost  obstacle  which  the  Lutheran  had  to 
overcome,  was  the  widespread  indifference  to  the  faith  of 
the  Church,  and  the  lamentable  ignorance  of  her  own 
members  concerning  the  true  spirit  of  the  Mother  Church 
of  the  Reformation,  from  which  they  had  been  thor- 
oughly alienated.  In  this  respect  the  Lutheran  "had 
indeed  its  audience  for  the  most  part  to  make.  Faithful 
and  successful  as  the  labors  of  the  Missionary  had  been 
in  dispelling  prejudice,  it  was  not  in  the  nature  of  things 
4 


50  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XI. 

that  the  work  of  a  few  years  should  undo  the  mischiefs 
which  had  been  growing  for  generations,  and  which  had 
enshrined  themselves  in  almost  every  institution  of  the 
Church.  There  was  hardly  a  part  of  Christendom  in 
which  some  of  the  distinctive  elements  of  Lutheranism 
were  so  grossly  misrepresented,  and  so  bitterly  hated,  as 
in  portions  of  the  nominally  Lutheran  Church.  It  seemed 
almost  impossible  for  the  Church  to  receive  a  hearing 
from  many  of  her  own  sons." 

In  the  face  of  all  these  formidable  difficulties  and  dis- 
couragements Dr.  Krauth  displayed,  in  the  highest  degree, 
that  cheerful  buoyancy  and  optimism  which  were  such 
prominent  features  in  his  character,  and  which  were 
based  on  his  firm  conviction  of  truth,  and  his  unswerving 
devotion  to  its  cause.  "Flattering  no  prejudices,  allow- 
ing itself  to  be  used  by  no  party,  the  Lutheran  throws 
itself  fearlessly  upon  the  sympathies  of  the  friends  of  the 
Truth.  If  it  cannot  live  as  a  witness  for  the  Truth  it 
does  not  wish  to  live  at  all."  But  he  himself  has  no 
doubts  as  to  the  vitality  of  the  paper.  He  is  sure  that 
"the  intelligence,  the  calm  and  deep  piety  and  the  noble- 
heartedness  of  the  Church  largely  look  to  this  paper  to 
represent  what  they  hold  most  dear;  that  it  has  done 
much  to  cultivate  a  taste  for  true  literature,  for  sound 
religious  and  theological  reading  in  the  Church;  that  it 
has  blessed  its  friends,  and,  against  their  own  will,  has 

blessed     its     enemies The     throbbing     of     the 

Church's  heart  is  in  it.  Those  who  love  it,  those  who 
write  for  it,  those  who  circulate  it,  those  who  pray  for 
it — they  it  is,  by  whom  under  God,  it  lives.  And  as  it 
lives  by  them,  so  it  lives  for  them  and  for  the  great  cause 
which  is  most  near  to  them." 

The  bitter  attacks  of  his  opponents  in  the  form  of 
"Sharp  Letters,"  he  meets  and  disarms  with  such  pleas- 
antries   as    this:     "We    would    inform    our    American 


1861-67.]  A  BRIGHT  OUTLOOK.  5 1 

Lutheran  patrons  who  seem  to  regard  us  fairly  a  target 
for  the  shafts  of  their  severity,  by  letter,  that  we  take 
all  these  things  in  the  most  amiable  way.  If  their  object 
be  to  amuse  us,  we  hope  they  will  keep  on  writing, 
especially  if  it  does  them  good.  If  their  object  be,  (not 
that  we  would  suspect  them  of  anything  so  malevolent, 
but  we  put  it  by  way  of  hypothetical  suggestion) — if 
their  object  be  to  make  us  uncomfortable,  we  feel  that  it 
is  due  to  them  that  they  should  be  informed  that  they 
don't  make  us  feel  uncomfortable  in  the  least.  As  we 
are  laboring  in  the  sacred  interest  of  truth,  we  care 
nothing  for  popularity.  We  have  counted  the  cost,  and 
are  encountering  nothing  we  did  not  anticipate ;  therefore, 
we  keep  a  cheerful  heart.  If  reproach  be  not  as  pleasant 
as  praise,  it  is  a  great  deal  safer." 

The  hopefulness  with  which  he  looked  forward  to  the 
future  of  the  Lutheran  finds  full  expression  in  the  leading 
article  which  introduced  the  "Fifth  Year  of  Its  Life," 
and  from  which  we  clip  the  following  passages : 

We  have  entered  upon  our  fifth  year,  with  much  to 
encourage  us.  That  it  is  our  fifth  year,  that  we  have 
passed  through  the  depressions  of  a  long  and  terrible  war, 
that  we  have  outlived  bitter  misrepresentation,  unscrupu- 
lous hatred,  the  vacillation  of  the  timid,  and  the  treach- 
ery of  the  double-minded, — this  is  in  itself  encouraging. 
To  us,  who  are  by  the  side  of  the  paper  daily,  it  presents 
nothing  that  speaks  of  a  dying  condition.  Its  financial 
prospects  never  seemed  so  hopeful.  Its  hold  upon  the 
hearts  of  its  friends  never  seemed  firmer.  The  arrange- 
ments of  the  coming  year  give  assurance  of  increased 
strength  in  every  department. 

The  Editors  of  the  paper  continue  their  former  rela- 
tions to  it,  but  will  have  the  valuable  aid  of  Rev.  C.  W. 
Schaeffer,  D.  D.,  in  the  department  of  Exchanges  and 
Selections;  of  Rev.  Joseph  A.  Seiss,  D.  D.,  and  of  Rev. 
G.  F.  Krotel,  D.  D.,  in  attending  to  the  large  and  grow- 
ing correspondence  of  the  paper ;   and  of   Rev.    W.   J. 


52  CHARLES  PORT  ERF  I  ELD  KRAUT  H.     [Chap.  XI. 

Mann,  D.  D.,  in  a  special  department  devoted  to  Foreign, 
and  especially  to  German  Items.  Rev.  F.  M.  Bird  will 
still  give  his  efficient  and  valued  aid  to  the  Library- 
Department,  especially  in  General  Literature  and  its 
associated  branches. 

All  these  arrangements,  we  think,  will  be  regarded  by 
our  readers  as  evidences  that  the  Lutheran  and  Mis- 
sionary means  not  only  to  live,  but  to  be  alive. 

When  the  Lutheran,  as  a  Quarto,  was  struggling  for 
life,  one  of  its  warm  friends,  writing  to  us,  echoed  in  a 
question,  the  constant  assertion  of  its  enemies.  He  asked : 
"Can  it  live?"  and  thereupon  paid  it  a  compliment  at  the 
expense  of  our  Church,  saying,  in  effect,  "The  paper  is 
a  good  thing,  and  just  what  the  Church  needs,  but  the 
Church  has  got  into  the  bad  habit  of  neglecting  just  what 
it  most  needs."  Pleasant  as  praise  may  be,  we  were  not 
then,  nor  are  we  now,  willing  for  our  paper,  or  for  our- 
selves, to  receive  compliments  at  the  expense  of  the 
Church.  We  do  not  concede  that  our  Church  neglects 
what  meets  its  wants,  though  it  may  sometimes  neglect 
what  men  think  it  wants.  This  paper,  in  its  infant  and 
in  its  adult  state,  has  had  reason  to  be  particularly  well 
satisfied  as  to  the  discriminating  power  of  the  Church. 
We  have  been  cheered  beyond  our  most  sanguine  expecta- 
tions, by  the  approval  of  the  Church,  as  shown  by  the 
manner  in  which  it  has  responded  to  the  efforts  of  those 
who  have  controlled  this  paper,  to  meet  the  wants  of  our 
pastors  and  people. 

In  the  union  of  the  two  papers,  the  Missionary  (for 
the  establishment  of  which,  and  its  labors  for  the  faith 
of  our  Church  and  its  glorious  mission  of  beneficence,  so 
much  gratitude  is  due  to  the  Rev.  Wm.  A.  Passavant, 
and  those  who  worked  with  him,)  and  the  Lutheran, 
even  the  enemies  of  both  might  have  been  supposed  to 
find  a  pledge  that  the  new  interest  had  vitality.  But  some 
of  them  were  not  yet  convinced,  and  still  they  murmured. 
It  will  die.  But  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary  still 
lives,  and  we  believe  is  destined  to  live.  It  has  passed 
the  most  critical  period  of  its  life.     The  predictions  of  its 


1861-67.]  WINNING  ITS  WAY.  53 

Speedy  death  had  nothing  at  all  to  warrant  them.  They 
originated  merely  in  the  wishes  of  those  who  were  its 
enemies,  and  who  tried  to  counteract  the  influence  of  its 
young  and  healthy  life  by  crying  out  that  it  was  in  a 
dying  condition. 

Over  and  beyond  all  discouragements  of  every  kind 
this  paper  has  been  winning  a  firmer  foothold.  Many 
of  its  earliest,  warmest  and  steadiest  friends  are  noble 
men,  who  may  not  see  eye  to  eye  with  us  in  all  things, 
but  who  wish  to  sustain  a  paper,  which  is  open,  candid, 
and  free  from  partisanship.  Some  of  the  strongest 
proofs  of  approval  and  sympathy  have  come  from 
brethren  who  we  supposed  would  be  indifferent — and  not 
a  few  from  those  who  we  feared  would  be  among  our 
active  opponents.  We  feared  this,  not  that  we  felt  that 
there  was  any  thing  to  justify  their  opposition,  but 
because  we  know  the  power  of  prejudice,  even  in  the 
minds  of  the  good,  and  because  we  see  daily  how  the 
grossest  misrepresentations  come  to  be  accepted  as 
truths,  simply  by  dint  of  repetition.  "Only  give  me," 
says  an  acute  observer  of  human  nature,  "only  give  me 
the  privilege  of  incessantly  repeating  uncontradicted,  that 
the  sun  does  not  shine,  and  I  will  at  length  bring  the  mass 
of  men  to  believe  it." 

We  know  that  our  labor  has  not  been  in  vain  in  the 
Lord.  We  have  marked  the  growth  too  perceptibly  to  be 
mistaken, — the  growth  in  our  Church  in  America,  of  a 
consciousness  that  her  faith  is  grounded  in  the  eternal 
Word,  and  that  her  distinctive  usages  are  among  the  fair- 
est bloom  of  Christian  liberty,  quickened  and  controlled 
by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord.  In  spite  of  all  the  efforts  of 
partisanship,  the  time  shows  itself  to  be  rapidly  coming 
when  the  men  who  resist  the  advance  of  the  Church,  the 
men  who  feel  no  sympathy  with  her  struggles,  will  find 
themselves  deserted.  To  hasten  the  glorious  consumma- 
tion of  the  triumph  of  our  Church's  pure  faith  and  divine 
life,  demands,  under  God,  above  all  things  else,  that  those 
who  control  our  church  papers  should  exhibit  genuine 
independence  and  moral  courage.     Those  never  will  be 


54  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XL 

wanting  who  "sacrifice  unto  their  net,  and  burn  incense 
unto  their  drag;  because  by  them  their  portion  is  fat,  and 
their  meat  plenteous."  But  a  great  church,  however  con- 
fiding and  enduring,  must  ultimately  be  waked  up  to 
show  them  that  there  is  a  point  at  which  the  most  patient 
refuse  to  be  longer  treated  "as  the  fishes  of  the  sea,  as 
the  creeping  things  that  have  no  ruler  over  them." 

In  the  good  work  which,  we  believe,  God  is  accom- 
plishing in  the  Church  through  those  who  are  willing 
to  work  with  Him,  we  hope  that  this  paper  has  borne  a 
part,  earnest,  though  humble,  and  we  desire  that,  by  His 
help,  it  may  do  yet  more.  Let  the  Church  continue  and 
enlarge  its  encouragement;  let  those  who  work  for  us, 
work  still ;  let  those  who  have  done  nothing,  do  some- 
thing; let  those  who  are  going  to  do  something,  stop 
going,  and  do  it  at  once.  Let  the  Church  do  all  it  can  for 
us,  and,  God  helping  us,  we  will  do  all  we  can  for  the 
Church  with  our  facilities  thus  enlarged. 

The  ground  on  which  his  hopes  for  the  ultimate  suc- 
cess of  the  paper  were  based,  is  set  forth  in  the  following 
article  (July  lo,  1862)  ; 

HOW  TO  MAKE  A  PAPER  SUCCEED. 

The  grand  object  of  a  paper  is,  as  we  understand  it, 
the  diffusing  of  truth.  Its  circulation  is  only  a  means, 
the  spreading  of  truth  is  its  end.  Its  circulation,  if 
detached  from  its  end,  is  pernicious.  If  a  paper  has  a 
circulation  of  a  hundred  thousand  subscribers  and  scatters 
falsehood  among  them,  that  paper  is  a  failure.  It  may 
put  money  in  the  pockets  of  its  projectors;  it  may  levy 
blackmail,  directly  or  indirectly,  from  those  who  are  weak 
enough  to  be  afraid  of  it;  it  may  mystify  and  perplex 
what  is  very  simple,  and  may  thus  seem  to  be  very  strong ; 
but  it  is  a  miserable  failure.  It  can  really  profit  nothing 
by  these  things,  for  it  has  exchanged  its  soul  for  them. 

On  the  other  hand,  no  paper  can  be  completely  a 
failure  which  is  outspoken  in  the  truth.  It  may  give 
offense  and  lose  subscribers,  but  it  has  honestly  tried  to 


1861-67.]  POPULARITY  DEARLY  BOUGHT.  55 

do  the  work  for  which  it  was  established.  Our  advice 
to  every  paper  which  has  been  injured  by  its  honesty  is 
this :  Be  more  honest !  Perhaps  you  have  helped  to 
produce  the  mischief  by  your  previous  timidity.  Don't 
speak  merely  enough  of  the  truth  to  arouse  its  enemies, 
but  go  on  speaking  it,  till  you  have  aroused  its  friends. 
Our  experience  is  that  for  one  doubtful  friend  lost  by 
honesty,  ten  genuine  ones  have  ultimately  been  gained  by 
it.  But  were  the  reverse  the  case,  the  path  of  duty  would 
be  no  less  plain. 

Some  men  choose  preachers  and  papers  to  have  smooth 
things  prophecied  to  them,  but  the  class  to  whom  an 
upright,  conscientious  and  fearless  preacher  and  paper 
must  look  for  support,  are  those  who  wish  to  know  the 
truth,  and  the  whole  truth,  however  deeply  it  may  probe 
the  sore  places. 

The  progress  of  merit  may  not  be  as  rapid  as  that  of 
charlatanery,  but  it  is  more  abiding;  popularity  may  be 
purchased  at  the  expense  of  truth, — but  the  purchase  is 
a  dear  one,  and  the  very  people  who  have  been  deluded 
by  the  tricks  of  falsehood,  and  the  wiles  of  demagogues, 
are  the  most  unrelenting  in  the  exposure  and  rejection  of 
them  when  their  eyes  are  opened.  For  papers,  as  for 
ourselves,  the  true  principle  is — Do  right,  and  leave  the 
result  to  God. 

Our  duty  and  responsibility  in  the  service  of  truth  are 
thus  forcibly  presented  in  the  following  lines  (March  6, 
1862)  : 

DIVINE  TRUTH. 

If  knowledge  be  separated  from  the  affections  and  the 
life,  it  results  in  "dead  orthodoxy",  which  is  a  bad  thing, 
— a  very  bad  thing ;  nothing  is  worse  than  a  dead  hetero- 
doxy, or  a  confused  animal  sensationalism,  which  mis- 
takes foam  and  fury  for  fervor,  and  which  runs  with 
rapidity  because  it  has  nothing  to  carry.  Any  human 
sensations,  emotions,  raptures,  which  are  not  wrought 
through  the  Word  of  God  by  its  doctrine,  are  fallacious, 
and  may  prove  destructive.     The  Word  of  God  is  our 


56  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap. XI. 

sheet  anchor,  and  if  any  wind,  whether  of  false  doctrine 
or  of  spurious  feehng,  break  us  from  that,  we  drift 
away,  and  are  cast  upon  the  shoals  and  lost.  Any  system 
which  undervalues  truth,  which  prizes  sensations  apart 
from  their  distinct  origin  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Word  of 
God,  brings  Christianity  down  to  the  level  of  Mesmeric 

manipulation 

The  most  specious  show  of  piety  which  ignores  the 
reality  of  divine  truth,  which  affirms  in  theory,  or  main- 
tains in  practice,  that  truth  and  error  are  not  essentially 
and  eternally  antagonistic,  runs  out  into  a  diseased  sub- 
jectivism and  fanaticism.  In  its  development,  it  tends 
to  morbid  sentimentalism,  then  to  latitudinarianism,  then 
to  rationalism,  and  at  last  to  open  infidelity.  The  moment 
a  man  is  silent  on  any  truth  because  it  is  opposed,  he 
accepts  a  principle  which  is  likely  ultimately  to  make  him 
silent  on  all  truth.  He  may  think  he  yields  it  because  he 
has  a  large,  liberal  nature.  He  really  yields  it  either 
because  he  is  too  uninformed  to  see  what  is  truth,  too 
defective  in  moral  earnestness  to  love  it  as  he  ought,  too 
deficient  in  courage  to  defend  it,  or,  because,  looking  upon 
religion  itself  as  the  minister  to  his  personal  vanity,  he 
will  not  fall  out  with  errorists,  because  he  courts  their 
good  will. 

In  the  faithful  adherence  to  the  truth  Dr.  Krauth,  at 
the  same  time,  saw  the  only  safe  and  practical  way  to  the 
real  and  healthy  union  of  the  Church. 

Can  we  have  genuine  unity,  without  a  hearty  consent 
to  the  same  articles  of  faith,  accepted  in  the  same  sense? 
Can  we  permanently  succeed  as  an  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church,  while  we  reject,  or  ignore,  or  leave  to  personal 
whim,  any  part  of  the  faith  in  which  our  Church  anchored 
herself,  while  the  storms  of  centuries  spent  themselves 
upon  her?  The  time  will  come,  when  the  questions 
which  were  so  much  to  our  fathers,  will  be  something  to 
us,  when  we  shall  see  that  those  questions,  which  gave  our 
Church  her  determinate  life,  the  questions  which  made 
her,  are  needful  to  save  her. 


1861-67.]  A  UNITED  CHURCH  POSSIBLE.  57 

The  time  of  doctrinal  anarchy,  which  our  sad  experi- 
ence has  proved  to  be  also  a  time  of  doctrinal  tyranny 
and  proscription,  will  give  way  to  the  recognition  of  the 
great  truth,  that  the  Church  is  earnestly  to  contend  for 
the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  Saints,  a  duty,  in  which  is 
involved  that  all  faiths  are  not  alike;  that  there  is  one 
faith  once  delivered  to  the  Saints  once  for  all ;  that  the 
Church  of  God  has  this  faith;  that  it  is  the  object  of 
assault ;  that  we  must  contend  for  it,  and  contend  earn- 
estly. Our  Church  in  this  country  will  yet  see  that  she 
is  derelict  in  her  most  sacred  duty  to  her  children  in 
offering  them  no  counsel  in  their  perplexity,  no  correction 
of  misrepresentations  which  alienate  them  from  the  pure 
faith  of  our  fathers  and  from  herself,  and  leave  them  at 
the  mercy  of  this  man's  little  book,  and  that  man's  little 
paper,  or  some  other  man's  or  men's  little  platform. 
....  Our  Church  in  the  General  Synod  has  not 
breathed  the  spirit  of  outspoken  Lutheranism,  at  least  has 
not  felt  as  our  fathers  felt,  the  necessity  of  plain  words 
on  disputed  points.  With  no  hierarchical  centre,  no 
liturgical  service  as  in  the  Episcopal  Church,  with  a  Con- 
gregationalism tending  in  its  elements  to  independency, 
and  robbing  us  of  strength  of  government,  we  have  had 
hardly  anything  to  hold  us  together  but  our  name  and  our 
history ;  and  detaching  these,  as  we  have  largely  done, 
from  their  vital  doctrinal  connexion,  we  have  exposed 
ourselves  to  the  hazards  of  division  and  dissolution.  If 
principle  did  not  demand  more  doctrinal  unity,  our  inter- 
ests would.  We  must  have  it,  or  our  experiment  in  this 
country  will  be  a  failure.  We  will  have  it,  and  with 
forbearance  mingling  itself  with  honesty,  we  shall  have 
it,  not  at  the  price  of  a  rent  and  bleeding  Church,  but  in 
our  Church,  then  truly  united. 

For   seven   years,    including   his   work   on   the   semi- 
monthly  Lutheran. — from  July   6,    i860,   to   June   27, 
1867, — Dr.  Krauth  held  the  position  as  Chief  Editor  of 
the  Lutheran,  when  its  management  passed  into  the  hands 
of  a   Committee,   consisting  of  Drs.    C.    W.    Schaeffer, 


58  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.     [Chap.  XL 

G.  F.  Krotel,  J.  A.  Seiss  and  W.  A.  Passavant.  On 
retiring  from  his  post  Dr.  Krauth  could  truly  say,  in  his 
last  editorial : 

Since  the  Lutheran  was  established  in  its  quarto  form, 
the  portion  of  our  Church  in  which  it  is  circulated  has 
passed  through  a  revolution,  the  greatness  and  importance 
of  which  it  is  hardly  possible  to  estimate.  Genuine 
Lutheranism  was,  at  that  time,  hardly  more  than  a  feeble 
tendency,  for  which  its  best  friends  seemed  to  ask  and 
hope  toleration,  rather  than  favor.  Now  pure  Lutheran- 
ism is  confessed  as  a  power,  and  by  none  more  eloquently 
than  by  the  very  men  who  are  trying  to  believe,  and  to 
make  others  believe  that  the  power  is  not  a  power  of 
God. 

The  work  which  he  did  as  Editor  of  the  Lutheran  was 
the  principal  instrumentality  in  bringing  about  the  forma- 
tion of  the  General  Council,  uniting  the  different  nation- 
alities and  languages  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  America, 
English,  German  and  Scandinavian,  on  the  basis  of  a  full 
and  unreserved  recognition  of  her  historic  Confession. 
No  higher  testimonial  could  have  been  given  to  the 
merits  and  influence  of  Dr.  Krauth's  work  in  this  field 
than  the  action  of  the  General  Council,  when,  in  the  full 
conviction  of  its  being  firmly  knit  together  in  the  unity  of 
the  one  faith,  it  finally  made  the  Lutheran  its  official 
organ,  under  the  editorship  of  Dr.  G.  F.  Krotel,  who  had 
been  one  of  the  earliest  co-workers  with  Dr.  Krauth. 


TWELFTH  CHAPTER. 

THE  NATIONAL  CRISIS. 
1860-1865. 

"I  am  first  a  Lutheran  and  then  an  American,"  Dr. 
Krauth  used  to  say.  But  there  was  no  conflict  between 
the  Lutheran  and  the  American  in  his  great  and  noble 
heart,  so  loyally  devoted  to  his  country  as  well  as  to  his 
Church.  His  healthy  scriptural  faith  made  him  all  the 
more  faithful  as  a  citizen,  well  balanced  even  in  times 
of  wildest  excitement,  in  the  midst  of  the  terrible  crisis 
through  which  our  land  passed  during  the  war  times  of 
i860  to  1865.  With  all  his  fiery  patriotism  he  was  not 
swayed  by  the  partizan  cry  of  political  passion ;  always 
fair  and  just,  loving  and  tender  towards  those  who, 
according  to  his  honest  conviction  had  gone  astray,  or, 
as  he  preferred  to  view  it,  who  had  been  led  astray.  Not 
to  revive  antagonisms  of  bygone  days,  but  to  picture  the 
true  Christian  patriot,  that  he  was,  we  present  to  our 
readers  some  of  Dr.  Krauth's  memorable  utterances  dur- 
ing those  times  of  conflict. 

AMERICA,    A    BLESSING    TO    OTHERS. 

Resting  on  God,  we  shall  be  the  bearers  of  blessings 
to  others.  As  those  noble  rivers  which  sweep  through 
our  land  bear  traces  to  the  sea  of  the  soil  through  which 
they  wind,  so  shall  the  swift  streams  of  living  thought, 
■which  spring  from  every  part  of  our  land,  grow  strong 
by  blending,  and  bear  their  tinges  to  the  ever-heaving 
heart  of  the  world.  And  as  the  breezes  which  play  over 
the  bloom  of  her  fields  and  forests,  move  out  from  the 
shore  to  gladden  the  souls  of  men  upon  the  deep,  so 
shall  each  wind  of  heaven  bear  the  fragrance  of  the  wild 

59 


6o  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIL 

flowers  of  her  freedom,  to  revive  the  heartsick  and  lan- 
guishing of  the  earth! 

O,  my  country,  I  salute  thee  with  reverence;  I  stand 
in  awe  before  the  image  of  the  greatness  which  Jehovah 
offers  thee.  Thou  art  already  "time's  noblest  offspring;" 
yet,  if  thou  walkest  humbly  before  thy  God,  thou  shalt 
see  the  birth  of  an  era  lovelier  than  thyself,  fairer  than 

painter's   touch   or   poet's   dream Hail    to   thee  I 

Serve  God  and  prosper.  Then,  "instead  of  fathers,  shall 
be  thy  children,  whom  thou  mayest  make  princes  in  all 
the  earth;  Jehovah  shall  make  thy  name  to  be  remem- 
bered in  all  generations !  the  people  shall  praise  thee  for 
ever;"  and  whatever  be  the  greatness  of  thy  greatest 
sons,  they  can  make  no  loftier  earthly  boast  than  when 
they  say,  "We,  too,  are  children  of  this  Mother  of  Men." 
(December  7,  i860.) 

He  sings  the  praises  of  his  native  state,  Virginia,  in 
an  address  delivered  at  Salem,  on  the  occasion  of  the 
inauguration  of  a  new  president  of  Roanoke  College : 

VIRGINIA, 

It  is  a  soil,  hallowed  by  the  ashes  which  are  the  treas- 
ures of  our  Nation,  the  object  of  an  undiminished  com- 
mon love  and  reverence  through  the  wildest  storms  of 
division,  in  which  the  dead  remained  the  sole  bond  of 
the  living.  But  to  me  it  is  a  soil  specially  hallowed  as  the 
resting  place  of  all  my  earliest  ancestry.  My  father's 
father  and  mother  lie  in  their  long  rest  amid  the  wild 
beauties  of  this  Eastern  Virginia, — Old  Virginia,  as  we 
love  to  call  it.  My  mother's  parents  sleep  in  the  sunny 
valley  of  the  Shenandoah;  and  in  Western  Virginia, 
knowing  not  my  loss,  I  was  borne,  an  infant,  from  the 
last  pressure  of  that  mother's  loving  arms,  to  be  taken 
to  them  no  more,  until  "the  day  break  and  the  shadows 
flee  away."  The  elect  Virginian  never  falls  from  the 
grace  of  a  loving  pride  in  the  State  of  his  nativity,  and 
one  bond  of  his  devotion  is  that  in  no  land  is  cultivated 
intellect  prized  more  than  in  Virginia.     The  intensity  of 


1860-65.]  OLD   VIRGINIA.  61 

aristocratic  feeling,  the  boast  of  ancestry,  the  pride  of 
family,  so  marked  as  traits  of  Virginia,  nowhere  more 
than  in  Virginia  completely  yield  to  the  claims  of  intel- 
lectual pre-eminence.  Her  aristocracy  is  but  the  column ; 
her  great  minds,  highly  cultured,  however  lowly  may 
have  been  the  original  position  of  their  possessors,  are 
the  statue  with  which  her  admiration  crowns  the  shaft. 
The  greatest  of  her  sons  next  after  Washington  in 
political  distinction,*  directed  that  on  his  monumental 
stone,  in  the  record  of  that  by  which  he  most  desired  to 
live  in  the  memory  of  men, — last  of  all,  as  if  it  were 
the  crown  of  the  whole, — should  be  inscribed  that  he 
was  "father  of  the  University  of  Virginia;"  and  in  this 
he  was  true  to  the  noblest  pride  of  the  class  which  has 
given  Virginia  her  place  irr  the  history  of  the  world. 

He  was  not  blind  to  the  besetting  sins  of  the  nation. 
He  would  have  none  of  that  patriotism  which  says : 
"My  country, — right  or  wrong!"  This  feeling,  he  was 
convinced,  would  tend  to  atheistical  presumption,  a  rush- 
ing towards  destiny,  in  which  conscience  and  humanity 
.are  trampled  beneath  the  feet.  Without  fear  or  favor 
he  would  lift  up  his  voice  like  a  trumpet,  and,  without 
sparing,  declare  unto  his  people  their  transgression. 

OUR  COUNTRY. 

No  thoughtful  man  can  deny  that  we  have  great 
national  sins.  It  is  true,  not  all  the  sins  in  a  nation  are 
properly  the  sins  of  a  nation.  A  nation  can  be  charged 
-with  the  sins  of  her  sons,  only  so  far  as  she  fosters  the 
spirit  of  those  sins,  or  is  indolent  or  indiscreet  in  her 
efforts  to  arrest  them.  To  strike  at  national  sins  requires 
something  more  than  clumsy  blows,  however  well  meant, 
and  vigorously  given,  at  whatever  may  not  square  with 
an  Utopian  imagination,  which  builds  castles  of  theory 
■on  foundations  of  fog.  No  man  is  competent  even  to 
•define,  still  less  to  correct  national  sins,  who  is  unable  or 

*  Thomas  Jefferson,  who  founded  the  University  of  Virginia  in  1819. 


62  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XII. 

unwilling  to  allow  for  the  imperfections  which,  in  the 
nature  of  things,  must  mar  the  noblest  institutions 
framed  or  administered  by  man.  Nor  must  the  sin  in 
a  twig  or  branch  of  the  national  tree  be  confounded  with 
the  sin  in  the  sap,  which  would  vitalize  and  reproduce  all 
the  mischief  which  might  be  lopped  off  in  the  brief  agony 
of  national  pruning.  Beneath  all  outward  manifesta- 
tions of  evil,  there  lies  in  men  and  nations  a  spirit  from 
which  it  unfolds  itself.  The  shape  of  sin  is  but  the 
incarnation  of  evil,  as  the  body  is  the  incarnation  of  the 
soul.  To  understand  national  sin,  we  must  see  its  soul, 
the  "original  sin"  which  generates  its  sins  of  purpose 
and  of  act.  In  vain  will  it  be  to  look  on  the  outward 
appearance,  to  paint  with  the  hues  of  health  the  wan 
cheek  of  the  consumptive,  to  efface  the  tokens  of  disease, 
and  imagine  the  work  is  done.  We  must  imitate  the 
divine  plan,  and  address  ourselves  to  the  correction  of 
the  life-principle  of  evil,  strive  to  discern  and  eradicate 
the  disease  itself,  even  as  Jehovah  creates  a  new  heart, 
and  the  new  heart  creates  the  new  man ;  even  as  He  gives 
health,  and  health  diffuses  its  own  glow. 

It  requires  no  long  or  minute  observation  to  be  satisfied 
that  every  nation  has  its  distinguishing  spirit,  from  whose 
direction  or  misdirection  arise  its  virtues  or  vices.  Often, 
indeed,  its  vices  spring  from  a  perversion  of  the  tendencies 
which,  rightly  directed,  would  make  a  nation  glorious ; 
"some  soul  of  goodness"  is  to  be  distilled  even  out  of  its 
"things  evil."  If  we  should  designate  that  peculiarity 
of  our  nation  which,  in  its  proper  working  and  under  due 
restraints,  is  the  source  of  her  energy,  her  independence 
and  her  progress,  and  which  yet,  in  its  exaggeration  and 
abuse,  may  become  the  source  of  ruinous  evils,  and  of 
ruin,  we  would  say,  it  is  her  spirit  of  self-reliance.  True 
self-reliance  is,  indeed,  a  noble  trait,  when  it  rests  on  the 
divine  promise,  and  feels  strong  in  itself,  because  God, 
its  refuge,  is  strong.  Its  feet  are  beautiful  upon  the 
mountains,  because  it  is  on  the  pathway  marked  out  by 
Jehovah  it  is  fearlessly  treading.  A  generous  confidence 
in  her  own  institutions,  and  in  her  own  strength ;  a  noble 


1860-65.]  NATIONAL  SELF-RELIANCE.  63 

self-respect,  which  will  not  lower  itself  to  so  base  a 
thing  as  crime,  however  tempting  may  be  the  lure — the 
movement  of  an  ardent  heart,  which  throbs  for  some- 
thing higher,  better  and  greater — these  are  the  life  and 
glory  of  a  young  state, 

— "  a  spirit  in  the  world 
That  causes  all  the  ebbs  and  flows  of  nations, 
Keeps  mankind  sweet  by  actions." 

But  there  is  a  natural  result,  and  in  the  present  condi- 
tion of  human  nature,  if  unrestrained,  an  almost  inevit- 
able result  of  continued  prosperity,  which  may  turn  the 
impulses  of  the  national  heart,  originally  so  generous  and 
exalting,  into  sources  of  crime  and  destruction.  Into 
this  condition  our  nation,  not  only  had  entered,  but  had 
advanced  to  an  alarming  degree.  We  were  verging  fast 
toward  a  reckless  and  arrogant  trust  in  ourselves;  a 
sentiment,  practically,  that  we  were  the  source  of  our 
own  blessings,  that  we  would  prosper  at  any  rate,  whether 
God  favored  us  or  not.  This  feeling  tended  to  an  athe- 
istical presumption,  a  rushing  toward  destiny,  in  which 
conscience  and  humanity  were  trampled  beneath  the  feet. 

God  has  stretched  forth  His  hand  as  signally  in 
redeeming  us  from  bondage,  as  He  stretched  it  forth  to 
Israel;  His  guidance  has  been  as  marvelous;  the  miracles 
of  His  mercy  as  manifold;  His  gifts  more  glorious;  our 
vocation  hardly  less  sublime :  "He  hath  not  dealt  so 
with  any  nation."  But  our  nation  has  not  meekly  knelt 
and  pressed  to  her  lips  and  her  heart,  the  hand  that  made 
her  great  and  happy.  She  has  not  acted  as  though  she, 
above  all  nations,  had  reason  to  rest  humbly,  thankfully, 
trustingly,  on  the  providence  of  God.  She  has  not 
weighed  the  awful  responsibility  of  her  distinguished 
position  and  privileges.  She  has  shown  a  disposition  to 
permit  herself  to  be  rapt  into  a  bewildering  dream,  a 
delirium  of  ambitious  self-conceit.  Our  nation  nursed 
the  feeling,  and  was  hardly  ashamed  to  confess  it,  that 
she  was  borne  on  by  a  kind  of  happy  fatality,  which 
neither  she  nor  others  could  resist.     Too  often,  instead 


64  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XII. 

of  guiding  herself  by  light  from  the  eternal  Throne,  the 
light  reflected  from  the  eternal  Word,  she  seemed  to  look 
to  a  "star  of  destiny," — not  the  star  which  guided  wise 
men  to  the  Prince  of  Peace,  but  to  that  meteoric  light 
which  led  the  mighty  murderers  of  mankind,  that  baleful 
glory  which  dazzled  them  into  a  career,  the  record  of  the 
crimes  and  sorrows  of  which  proves  that  no  falsehood, 
however  gross,  can  be  safely  left  to  the  self-annihilating 
power  of  its  own  absurdity,  that  no  trust,  however  weak 
in  itself,  may  not  assume  a  deadly  power,  when  it  can  be 
used  by  men  as  a  pretext  for  doing  what  they  already 
desire. 

It  is,  indeed,  easy  to  impress  upon  the  mind  of  a  nation 
a  thought  which  so  dignifies  our  nature  as  this,  that  we 
are  carrying  out  the  plans  of  God.  To  regard  them- 
selves as  co-workers  with  the  Omnipotent,  is  flattering  to 
men,  and  to  lead  them  to  feel  this,  is  consequently  easy ; 
but  to  make  them  realize  the  fearful  accountability  which 
is  connected  with  their  mission,  the  responsibility  which 
attends  men,  either  as  the  ministers  of  the  benevolence  or 
of  the  vengeance  of  God — this  is  hard,  because  it  checks 
the  presumption  of  man,  sweeps  to  the  earth  his  pride, 
and  holds  his  depravity  in  rein.  Men  do  not  love  to  be 
told  that  they  are  but  instruments,  whose  course  a  will 
above  their  own  has  the  absolute  right  of  determining; 
that  they,  without  any  reservation  whatever,  are  the 
dependent  subjects  of  a  King,  through  whom  alone  that 
success  is  possible  which  they  imagine  they  control,  and 
to  whom  alone  its  glory  is  due. 

Detached  from  a  heart-felt  reliance  upon  God,  as  by 

its  very  nature  it  tends  to  be,  and  unchecked  even  by  the 

healthy  caution  of  self-love,  as  it  soon  becomes,  there  is 

no   madness   of   scheme,   no   wickedness   of    policy,    no 

atrocity  in  action,  to  which  such  an  unhallowed  ambition, 

such  a  fatalistic  inflation,  will  not  furnish  a  plea.     To 

every  appeal  to  national  honor,  to  public  integrity,  to 

common  morality,  when  they  come   in  the  way  of  its 

purposes,  the  cool  reply  will  be : 

"  Who  can  turn  the  stream  of  destiny, 
Or  break  the  chain  of  strong  necessity, 
Which  fast  is  tied  to  Jove's  eternal  throne  ?" 


i86o-6s.]        A  NATION  SITTING  IN  DARKNESS.  65 

Atheism  has  assumed  the  robes  of  Rehgion ;  men  have 
called  their  immoral  plottings,  plans  of  providence,  and 
have  given  the  name  of  divine  sovereignty  to  the  brutish- 
ness  of  human  license;  the  most  hallov^^ed  names  are 
played  off  against  the  most  hallowed  things;  the  devil,  in 
terms  of  Scripture,  has  tempted  a  nation  to  worship  him ; 
the  designing  have  poured  into  the  golden  vessels  they 
have  stolen  from  the  "^'temple  of  the  house  of  God,"  the 
poisonous  draught,  at  the  drunken  banquet  of  national 
conceit;  the  thoughtless  and  indolent,  tricked  by  the 
"great  swelling  words  of  vanity,"  have  seemed  to  believe 
that  by  some  legerdemain  of  language,  evil  had  actually 
become  good,  and  darkness  light,  and  bitter  sweet.  Oh, 
how  much  there  has  been  in  the  past,  to  make  the  hearts 
of  the  good  to  grow  sick  with  fear. 

And  now  their  worst  fears  are  realized.  The  chasten- 
ing hand  of  God  is  on  our  land.  A  vast  crisis  has  been 
precipitated  on  the  nation.  There  rests  upon  our  land 
the  gloom  of  an  undefinable  horror.  At  the  mid-noon  of 
her  prosperity,  her  sun,  not  as  by  eclipse,  nor  by  sudden 
descent  to  the  horizon,  but  as  if  it  sunk  away  into  the  very 
zenith,  sheds  no  more  the  beams  of  its  full  glory,  but 
suffuses  all  things  with  the  pallor  of  a  "darkness  visible." 

There  have  been  sins  which  have  covered  our  whole 
land  from  Maine  to  Georgia,  and  from  the  Atlantic  to 
the  Pacific.  There  is  nothing  in  which  we  have  been 
more  thoroughly  a  Union  than  in  some  forms  of  guilt. 
In  these  there  has  been  no  North  or  South,  there  has 
been  no  East  and  no  West.  There  are  sins  enough 
common  to  our  whole  land,  to  justify  God  in  sweeping 
our  whole  land  with  desolation.  There  is  but  one  way 
of  safety  possible.  It  is  by  an  humbling  of  ourselves 
before  God,  as  universal  and  as  complete  as  our  sins  have 
been.  If  our  whole  land  bows  before  God,  our  whole 
land  may  be  saved — if  a  part  turns  to  Him  that  part 
may  be  saved.  Without  this  we  may  be  scourged  by 
God's  most  awful  plague — the  letting  loose  of  man 
against  man  till  earth  becomes  a  hell.  Without  this, 
peace,  if  we  obtain  it,  will  be  hollow,  transient — delusive 
5 


66  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XII. 

— the  prelude  for  more  fearful  chastisements.  Will  not 
our  nation  give  up  its  horrible  atheism  and  act  as  if  there 
were  a  God  ?  Till  we  see  our  country  humble  and  peni- 
tent,— till  we  see  her  full  of  the  energy  of  a  living  faith 
in  God,  and  filled  with  a  spirit  which  shall  make  interces- 
sions for  her  in  groanings  that  cannot  be  uttered, — till 
then  our  hearts  will  be  saddened.  These  are  hours  in 
which  the  people  should  be  called  to  the  reading  of  their 
hearts,  hours  in  which  the  saints  should  cling  to  the 
mercy-seat  and  the  ministers  of  God  the  Lord  weep 
between  the  porch  and  the  altar.  Lord,  save  us,  we 
perish!  1857.      1861. 

POLITICS  AND  RELIGION. 

When  the  artful  question :  Is  it  lawful  to  pay  tribute 
to  Caesar  or  not  ?  was  put  to  our  blessed  Lord,  He  neither 
cut  the  knot  nor  fell  into  the  snare.  He  answered  the 
question.  He  committed  those  who  put  it  to  the  truth 
and  justice  of  His  answer  before  He  gave  it;  He  made  it 
impossible  for  them  to  condemn  Him  without  condemn- 
ing themselves ;  He  answered  explicitly  and  unmistakably 
and  yet  dashed  to  the  ground  their  council  of  evil. 

Our  blessed  Lord  was  a  patriot.  He  loved  His  native 
land.  Its  hills,  its  vales,  its  streams,  were  dear  to  Him — 
its  hamlets,  its  cities,  and  its  great  metropolis.  He  sym- 
pathized with  its  toiling  and  oppressed  thousands.  He 
wept  over  Jerusalem.  He  labored  to  mitigate  its  political 
evils.  On  this  question  His  sympathies  were  all  with  His 
people.  He  knew  the  grief  of  the  tribute.  He  estimated 
in  all  their  breadth  and  depth  the  feelings  of  opposition 
to  it.  He  saw  the  logic  of  all  the  argument;  he  felt  the 
moral  force  of  all  the  genuine  opposition  to  it. 

Like  a  true  patriot  the  Saviour  had  an  opinion  on  this 
great  question.  It  is  hard  for  men  whose  hearts  are  with 
their  kind,  not  to  form  some  opinion  on  the  subjects 
which  deeply  agitate  the  public  mind.  It  is,  indeed,  every 
man's  duty,  calmly,  conscientiously  to  labor  to  have  a 
just  opinion ;  and  it  is,  in  many  respects,  less  mischievous 
that  men  should  have  erroneous  opinions,  than  that  they 


1860-65]  C^SAR  AND  GOD.  67 

should  remain  passive  and  have  no  opinion  at  all.  A 
man  in  error  is  nobler  than  a  clam,  which  has  no  errors 
because  it  has  no  ideas.  A  partisan  is  a  man  who  does 
injustice  to  one  part  for  the  sake  of  the  other,  but  a  man 
who  takes  no  interest  in  one  or  the  other,  does  injustice 
to  both  parts  for  the  sake  of  himself.  The  men  who 
have  no  opinions  make  the  class  who  are  either  absolutely 
inert,  who  are  neither  cold  nor  hot,  or  they  are  the  class 
who  put  themselves  up  at  auction  to  the  leaders  who  have 
opinions,  or  are  engaged  in  the  manufacture  of  them. 
They  are,  as  a  class,  the  most  unprincipled  and  dangerous 
of  men. 

It  was  like  our  Saviour  then  to  have  an  opinion.  His 
enemies  knew  that  He  would  never  take  refuge  in  the  plea 
which  would  have  been  the  very  one  a  weak  man  would 
have  resorted  to,  the  plea  that  He  had  formed  no  opinion. 

His  opinion  was  shaped,  not  by  His  sympathies,  but  by 
His  judgment ;  not  by  abstract  theories,  but  by  the  hard, 
fixed  facts  that  were  around  Him.  No  Jew  felt  more 
keenly  everything  that  could  be  urged  against  the  paying 
of  the  tribute  than  Jesus  Himself  felt  it,  and  if  He  had 
reasoned  with  His  feelings,  and  had  put  His  heart  above 
His  head,  He  would  have  replied:  'Tt  is  not  lawful  to 
pay  the  tribute." 

The  Saviour  not  only  had  an  opinion,  but  He  expressed 
it.  When  urged  privately,  though  the  motives  of  those 
who  urged  Him  were  wrong,  He  spoke  out.  He  did  not 
select  the  theme  Himself ;  He  did  not  preach  to  the  people 
His  views  on  politics,  though  those  views  were  infallibly 
right.  He  expressed  no  political  views  in  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount.  So  great  was  His  caution,  that  when  the 
effort  was  made  to  work  His  destruction  through  the 
Roman  government.  His  enemies  could  lay  hold  of  noth- 
ing except  that  He  had  declared  Himself  to  be  a  king, 
and  that  declaration  had  always  been  guarded  in  such  a 
way  as  to  show  that  His  kingdom  was  purely  spiritual. 
But  with  the  common  rights  of  a  man  He  felt  that  He 
could  express  His  opinion,  and  He  did  express  it,  and 
He  taught  that  while  the  sanctuary  is  no  place  for  the 


6S  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XII. 

discussion  of  the  partisan  questions  which  divide  good 
men,  and  that  the  pulpit  is  not  the  place  for  politics  in  a 
narrow  sense,  He  also  taught  us  that  Christian  men  and 
Christian  ministers  are  not  to  cut  themselves  off  from  the 
thoughtful  examination  of  the  great  questions  of  the 
day,  and  that  at  proper  times  and  under  proper  circum- 
stances, controlled  by  charity  and  prudence,  they  may 
utter  what  they  believe. 

And  what  was  that  opinion?  Look  at  its  character- 
istics. How  had  it  been  formed  ?  It  rested  on  the  solid 
facts  of  the  case.  The  leading  fact  was  that  the  nation 
was  actually  subdued.  The  question  of  tribute  was  not 
a  question  of  choice.  It  was  hard  to  pay  tribute.  It 
would  be  harder  to  be  butchered;  to  see  their  wives  and 
daughters  given  into  the  hands  of  brutal  soldiers,  and 
their  nation  destroyed. 

If  the  Roman  government  was  sustained  by  this  tribute, 
so  was  their  own  within  certain  limits.  Their  personal 
freedom  was  guaranteed.  They  themselves  declared : 
"We  have  never  been  slaves  to  any  man."  Their  free- 
dom of  conscience  was  untouched.  They  were  not 
obliged  to  sacrifice  to  idols  nor  prevented  from  worship- 
ping their  God  according  to  their  convictions  of  duty. 
The  individual  conscience  was  let  alone.  If  the 
Romans  took  tribute  and  devoted  it  in  part  to  sustaining 
heathenism,  the  Jew  could  not  prevent  the  abuse.  As  he 
did  not  give  tribute  for  the  purpose,  and  could  not  help 
giving  it,  the  government  was  responsible  and  he  was 
not.  If  the  government  had  tried  to  compel  him  to  go  to 
the  temple  and  worship  a  false  god,  he  should  have  died 
rather  than  yield.  Thus  in  later  times  Christians  freely 
gave  tribute.  They  did  not  refuse  to  serve  the  govern- 
ment in  any  way;  they  gave  fortune  and  life,  even  to 
rulers  that  oppressed  them,  but  where  the  slightest 
infringement  was  made  on  individual  conscience,  they 
went  to  the  dungeon  and  scaffold  rather  than  yield. 
Rather  than  utter  a  word  of  reproach  against  the  name 
of  their  Master,  or  scatter  a  few  grains  of  incense  before 
a  statue  of  the  emperor  they  went  cheerfully  to  the  death. 


1860-65.]  THE    UNION,    NOT    UNIONS.  69 

Another  feature  of  the  Saviour's  answer  was,  that  it 
confined  itself  strictly  to  the  question.  He  did  not 
deviate  from  it  or  launch  out  into  the  manifold  topics 
which  it  might  easily  have  opened.  He  did  not  discuss 
the  question  whether  it  was  right  for  the  Romans  to 
subjugate  His  nation,  or  right  to  hold  them,  or  whether 
the  tax  was  a  proper  one.  Nor  did  He  discuss  the  ques- 
tion whether  the  people  as  a  people  had  the  right  to  throw 
off  the  yoke  if  they  could,  and  free  themselves  from  their 
tyrants  and  their  tribute.  These  were  not  the  question. 
The  question  was  this :  Whether  the  people,  having  been 
subjugated  and  actually  submitting,  and  the  government 
actually  standing,  being  the  government  in  fact  of  the 
land — whether  it  was  lawful  for  the  individual,  lawful 
for  him  in  conscience  and  before  God  to  pay  this  tribute  ? 
And  to  this  the  Saviour  distinctly  rephes  that  it  was 
lazvful.     (March  6,  1862.    Also,  Csesar  and  God,  1874.) 

THE  UNION. 

There  is  a  bond  stronger  than  steel  that  holds  these 
States  together, — but  there  is  no  bond  to  hold  the  half  of 
them  together.  Whatever  may  be  the  difficulties  of 
having  one  Union  on  these  shores,  there  are  still  greater 
in  the  way  of  having  two  or  three  Unions.  Without  this 
great  Union,  State-rights  will  be  worth  nothing.  The 
States  will  perish  with  the  rights. 

Our  Union  once  overthrown,  cannot  be  reconstructed. 
If  the  theory  on  which  our  government  stands,  is  the  true 
one,  we  need  no  reconstruction, — we  must  not  tolerate 
the  thought  of  it.  H  the  theory  on  which  the  rebellion 
is  based  is  true,  the  Union  would  not  be  worth  recon- 
structing. 

No  nation  dies  more  than  once.  There  is  a  power 
which  indeed  once  raised  the  dead,  but  that  power  never 
raised  one  who  died  by  his  own  hand,  li  our  land  com- 
mits suicide,  it  will  never  live  again.      (July  5,  1861.) 


■JO  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XII. 


THE  FIRST   BEST  THING  WE  CAN  DO  FOR  OUR  COUNTRY. 

You  ask  as  a  patriot  what  is  the  first  best  thing  I  can 
do  for  my  country  now  ?  I  wish  to  aid  her  to  the  utmost 
of  my  abihty.  My  property — my  hfe — all — all — I  am 
ready  to  sacrifice.  What  shall  I  do  ?  The  first  best 
thing  for  every  man  in  these  hours  is  as  clear  as  the 
sunbeam.  If  you  are  not  a  Christian,  the  first  best  thing 
for  your  country  is  to  come  to  your  Saviour  as  a  hearty 
penitent.  The  first  best  thing  you  can  do  on  earth  for 
your  country  is  to  put  within  it  one  more  living  child  of 
God — the  first  best  thing  you  can  do  in  heaven  for  your 
country  is  to  establish  there  another  interest  of  pleading, 
and  of  agonizing  prayer.  Go — You  can  do  nothing  for 
your  country  till  you  have  laid  hold  on  the  arm  on  which 
your  country's  destiny  now  hangs.  We  have  no  refuge, 
none,  none  but  God's  pity.  Your  first  best  thing  for 
your  country  is  to  give  yourself  a  right  to  appeal  to 
that  pity. 

And  what  is  the  first  best  work  God's  children  can  do 
for  their  country?  It  is  to  draw  nearer  to  their  God — 
in  a  more  full  and  unreserved  consecration,  and  to  use 
with  their  whole  heart  for  their  country,  their  interest 
with  Him  they  love.  The  greatest  power  they  can  exer- 
cise is  not  in  the  heated  discussion  of  the  hour,  not  on  the 
street,  not  in  the  public  meeting — no — no — these  ques- 
tions will  not  be  settled  between  man  and  man — they 
must  be  settled  between  man  and  God.  The  halls  of 
debate  will  not  settle  them,  the  Cabinet  will  not  settle 
them,  the  Bench  will  not  settle  them — if  they  are  settled 
by  any  power  which  connects  itself  at  all  with  man,  they 
will  be  settled  by  the  closet — by  the  silent  energy  of 
fervent  prayer.  Some  trust  in  chariots  and  some  in 
horses — some  trust  in  speed,  and  some  in  strength — some 
in  the  craft  of  counsel  and  some  in  the  munitions  of  war 
— but  we  will  remember  the  name  of  our  God.  Peace 
must  be  linked  with  righteousness,  and  peace  to  our 
nation  must  spring  from  peace  in  the  hearts  of  her  sons. 


i86o-6s.]       EVERETT'S  GETTYSBURG  ORATION.  -ji 

Whatever  be  the  second  good  thing,  we  may  be  sure  of 
the  first  best.  Let  us  do  this.  It  may  help  to  save  our 
country — nothing  we  can  do  can  bless  our  country  so 
much,  yet  if  it  brings  not  to  our  country  all  we  desire,  it 
will  be  certain  in  its  results  to  ourselves. 

If  we  hearken  to  God's  commandments — amid  all  the 
storm  and  uproar  of  human  passions  which  shall  rush  like 
torrents  over  the  land,  our  peace  shall  be  like  a  river — 
amid  the  violence  and  crime  which  war  engenders,  and 
which  shall  dash  like  the  roaring  surf  on  rock-bound 
coasts,  our  righteousness  shall  be  as  the  waves  of  the  sea. 
(April  19,  1861.) 

THE  NATIONAL  CEMETERY  AT  GETTYSBURG. 

Dr.  Krauth  was  present  at  the  dedication  of  the 
National  Cemetery  with  its  monument  to  the  soldiers 
fallen  in  the  battle  of  July,  1863.  His  impressions  of 
Mr.  Everett's  oration  are  given  in  the  Lutheran  of 
November  26,  1863 : 

Finished  in  style,  and  logical  in  argument,  it  beauti- 
fully fitted  the  appropriate  action,  and  the  clear,  well 
trained  voice  of  our  American  Cicero.  Not  without 
touches  of  pathos,  it  yet  lacked  something  of  the  tender- 
ness and  profound  feeling  which  would  have  character- 
ized a  perfect  oration  for  such  a  day.  Well  reasoned  on 
every  point  it  discussed,  it  yet  perhaps  lacked  in  unity 
and  in  that  movement  around  one  great  centre  which  are 
necessary  to  a  speech  of  the  highest  order.  It  took 
perhaps  too  much  from  the  dead  and  gave  too  much  to 
the  questions  of  the  hour,  and  was  not  without  repetition 
of  what  the  world  had  already  heard  from  the  author. 
But  even  the  things  which  might  be  regarded  as  defects 
in  it,  considered  in  its  relations  to  the  time  of  its  utter- 
ance and  the  place  in  which  it  was  delivered,  will  add  to 
its  positive  value,  as  a  speech  to  be  circulated,  read,  pon- 
dered and  preserved.  It  shows  that  the  snow  upon  the 
venerable  head  of  Mr.  Everett  has  not  chilled  the  vital 
powers  of  his  highly  cultivated  mind. 


72  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XII. 

Even  on  that  solemn  occasion  his  sense  of  humor  did 
not  forsake  Dr.  Kratith,  as  appears  from  the  following- 
item,  which  accompanies  the  above  quoted  reference  to 
Mr.  Everett's  oration : 

The  incongruities  which  make  us  smile,  mingle  them- 
selves with  what  is  sublimest  and  what  is  saddest  in  our 
human  life.  The  monkey  nestles  in  the  palm  trees ;  the 
tear  is  caught  in  the  furrows  of  a  smile. 

Entering  the  cemetery  at  Gettysburg,  on  the  day  which 
commemorated  the  great  battles  in  which  it  was  the 
centre  of  one  of  the  fiercest  conflicts  which  have  ever 
shaken  our  world,  we  noticed  the  old  weatherbeaten 
board,  placed  within  its  gate  long  ago,  when  men  never 
dreamed  that  the  peaceful  hills  would  echo  to  a  sharper 
shot  than  that  which  would  bring  quail  or  squirrel  to  the 
hunter's  bag.  On  that  old  board,  as  if  it  would  make  us 
smile  even  while  our  hearts  ached  in  intense  feeling,  stood 
the  following  warning  :  "All  persons  discharging  any 
gun,  or  other  fire-arm  on  these  grounds  shall  be  fined 
FIFTY  DOLLARS."  Alas !  We  could  not  smile  long  on 
the  playful  suggestion,  or  at  the  thought  of  the  wealth 
which  would  pass  into  the  hands  of  those  to  whom  that 
city  of  the  dead  belongs,  if  this  penalty  could  be  exacted 
for  every  shot  which  had  there  been  fired  in  that  ever 
memorable  opening  week  of  July.  We  looked  from  the 
quaint  warning  toward  the  fresh  heaps  of  earth  which 
told  of  the  brave  who  sleep  where  they  fought;  and  the 
dimming  tear  rose  the  more  quickly  and  sadly  for  the 
momentary  smile. 

The  question  may  be  asked,  why  Dr.  Krauth,  in  speak- 
ing of  the  Gettysburg  celebration,  had  not  a  word  to  say 
of  President  Lincoln's  address  on  that  memorable  occa- 
sion? Was  it  that,  with  him  also,  the  address  failed  to 
create  a  profound  impression  at  the  time  of  its  delivery, 
as  was  undoubtedly  the  case  with  many  of  its  hearers, 
and  that  the  full  realization  of  the  grandeur  of  that 
immortal  speech  only  grew  upon  him,  as  it  was  read  and 


1860-65.]  PRESIDENT   LINCOLN.  73 

re-read  in  later  days?  His  silence  at  the  time  was 
certainly  not  due  to  any  lack  of  appreciation  of  Lincoln's 
character  and  work.  In  his  discourse  "The  Two 
Pageants,"*  delivered  in  the  First  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church  in  Pittsburgh,  on  June  ist,  1865,  he  paid  a  glow- 
ing tribute  to  the  martyred  President,  "a  true  type  of 
the  land  he  loved,  great,  strong  and  careless  of  beauty, 
yet  growing  toward  it  in  the  refinings  of  trial ;  his  heart 
as  tender  as  a  woman's,  and  his  patience  a  soul  of  peace 
within  him  while  warfare  raged  around  him;  so  firm 
and  yet  so  forgiving;  so  true  to  his  land,  yet  so  gentle  to 
its  foes;  so  unconscious,  so  genial,  so  childlike." 

It  was,  indeed,  a  strange  and  somewhat  tragi-comical 
coincidence,  that,  when  the  news  of  Lincoln's  assassina- 
tion reached  Philadelphia  Dr.  Krauth's  residence  in  Ger- 
mantown  came  near  being  mobbed  by  an  infuriated 
rabble.  The  Doctor  was  absent  from  home,  and  Mrs. 
Krauth.  a  native  of  Virginia  and  very  outspoken  in  her 
sympathies  with  the  South,  either  from  sheer  thought- 
lessness or  in  bold  defiance  of  popular  sentiment,  had  not 
only  neglected  to  place  the  emblems  of  national  mourn- 
ing over  the  door,  but  had  even  made  a  display  of  flowers 
in  the  windows!  It  needed  the  intercession  of  a  neigh- 
bouring Lutheran  clergyman  and  his  courageous  wife  to 
calm  the  excited  crowd,  with  the  assurance  that  the  gentle- 
man whose  home  was  threatened  with  violence  was  a 
loyal  patriot  and  a  sincere  admirer  of  the  martyred 
President.  It  is  needless  to  say  that  the  terrified  lady 
gracefully  yielded  to  popular  feelings  and  hastened  to 
procure  the  crape  that  was  to  prove  that  her  house  made 
no  exception  to  the  universal  display  of  national  mourn- 
ing. 

When,  at  last,  the  war  had  ceased,  no  one  spoke  kinder 
and  stronger  words  for  peace  and  reconciliation  between 

*  Printed  by  W.  S.  Haven,  Pittsburgh,  1865. 


74  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XII. 

those  who  had  been  estranged  and  separated  in  State  and 
Church  than  Dr.  Krauth  in  the  summer  of  1865. 

ANOTHER  VICTORY  TO   BE   WON. 

Amid  the  rejoicings  of  our  nation  over  the  greatest 
victory  ever  won,  we  must  not  forget  that  we  have 
another  victory  to  win,  no  less  grand,  the  victory  which 
Christian,  fraternal  love  and  humanity  win  over  preju- 
dice, and  wounded  pride  over  fear,  doubt  and  the  sick 
heart.  Of  the  mass  of  the  greatest  sufferers,  an  im- 
mense proportion  have  been  unwilling  actors  in  this 
tragedy  of  crime.  Heart-broken  and  despairing,  they 
gather  about  their  desolate  hearths  or  move  among  the 
wrecks  of  former  happiness,  shadows  among  shadows, 
their  property  gone,  their  loved  ones  dead,  the  sharp 
pressure  of  the  commonest  wants  of  life  upon  them.  We 
must  not  leave  the  noblest  part  of  the  South  to  die  of  a 
broken  heart.  Great  in  conquering,  our  nation  must 
show  itself  greater  in  forgiving.  Let  it  not  be  said  that 
we  did  not  meet  sorrow  and  penitence  with  the  spirit  of 
heavenly  tenderness,  that  we  could  not  bury  animosity, 
however  just  it  might  seem.  These  glorious  free  states 
once  shared  and  helped  to  foster  the  delusions  which,  at 
last,  matured  in  conspiracy  and  rebellion.  The  richest 
part  of  our  heritage  from  the  war  is  the  knowledge  that 
He  who  chastises  for  sin  is  ready  to  forgive — ready  to 
blot  out.  Let  us  be  like  God.  Our  country  must  and 
will  stand  firm  upon  the  great  principles  of  humanity, 
right,  freedom  and  law,  for  which  the  precious  blood  of 
our  noblest  sons  has  been  spilled,  and  our  brave  soldiers 
and  sailors  have  battled  and  endured.  But  because  she  is 
fixed  forever  by  God's  good  providence  in  her  faith  in 
God's  teachings  to  her,  because  she  stands  upon  this  rock, 
she  can  grasp  with  her  strong  hand  the  outstretched  hand 
that  pleads  for  pity  from  the  wild  sea  covered  with 
wrecks — a  pity  which  must  be  given  now,  or  withheld 
forever.      (May  11,  1865.) 


1860-65.]  THE  SYNODS  OF  THE  SOUTH.  75 

WHAT  SHALL  WE  DO   WITH   THEM? 

It  might  be  thought  rational  and  judicious,  that  the 
question :  What  shall  we  do  in  the  case  of  the  Southern 
Synods,  if  they  propose  to  return  to  the  General  Synod? 
should  be  deferred  until  we  have  some  sort  of  evidence 
that  they  are  willing  to  return.  It  is,  nevertheless,  possi- 
ble that  the  spirit  they  suppose  to  move  their  brethren  in 
the  North,  may  have  its  influence  in  determining  their 
course.  We  think  they  will  find  in  that  spirit  no  barrier 
in  their  way.  If  they  are  willing  they  will  probably  make 
application  in  the  usual  way,  and  the  sole  question  will  be  : 
Do  they  conform  to  the  constitutional  requisitions?  The 
General  Synod  has  no  constitutional  power  to  make  the 
political  position  or  political  offenses  of  a  confessedly 
regular  Lutheran  Synod  a  ground  of  exclusion,  if  it 
■demands  admission,  in  the  manner  and  with  the  pre- 
requisites defined  in  the  constitution. 

The  General  Synod  is  a  voluntary  confederation  of  the 
laxest  kind.  It  disavows  again  and  again  all  governing 
power.  It  does  not  legislate.  The  Synods  do  not  bind 
themselves  by  its  resolutions.  The  General  Synod 
claims  no  right,  even  of  moral  coercion.  If,  therefore, 
the  dreadful  lessons  of  the  war  have  not  made  our  South- 
ern brethren  wiser  on  the  subject  of  slavery,  they  do  not, 
by  merely  joining  the  General  Synod,  bind  themselves  to 
the  acceptance  of  its  utterances  on  that  subject.  If  they 
wish  to  come  back  there  is  nothing  in  the  way  of  their 
return. 

If  they  are  going  to  return,  it  will  be  easiest  and  best 
for  them  to  return  now.  The  close  of  the  war  furnishes 
■a  natural  solution  of  their  desire  at  once  to  return.  If 
they  defer  it,  it  will  be  hard  to  give  a  good  reason  for  a 
future  return,  over  and  above  the  reason  for  returning 
at  once. 

The  punishment  of  the  Rebellion  may  very  safely  be 
left  where  it  properly  belongs — with  the  Government, 
which  has  a  fuller  knowledge  of  the  facts,  and  can  act 
with   a   discrimination   which   it   is   impossible    for   any 


76  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIL 

Other  power  to  exhibit.  While  the  Rebelhon  was  in 
arms,  the  true  pohcy  was  to  accept  with  every  power  of 
our  great  land  the  ordeal  to  which  it  forced  us — to 
strike  our  hardest  blows,  and  not  to  listen  to  mercy  till 
justice  had  been  satisfied.  Now  the  time  for  gentleness 
and  the  binding  of  wounds  has  come.  The  Church  has 
worthily  done  her  part  in  strengthening  the  public  senti- 
ment which  made  our  noble  Government  mighty  in  war. 
It  is  now  her  yet  more  congenial  and  Christ-like  mission 
to  strengthen  that  Government  in  its  work  of  harmoniz- 
ing, of  restoring  peace,  and  of  saving  the  downcast  and 
despairing  from  themselves.  The  first  duty  of  the 
Lutheran  Church  in  this  work  is  to  save  her  own  mem- 
bership in  the  South. 


THIRTEENTH  CHAPTER. 

THE   LITERARY    CONTROVERSY   AGAINST   AMERICAN 
LUTHERANISM. 

1861-1867. 

The  establishment  of  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary 
naturally  and  unavoidably  led  to  a  literary  warfare 
against  the  New  School  or  American  Lutheranism,  of 
which  the  Lutheran  Observer  was  the  principal  expo- 
nent. At  the  outset  Dr.  Krauth's  attitude  in  this  contro- 
versy was  purely  defensive.  In  "defending  his  defense" 
of  historical  Lutheranism  he  challenged  his  opponents : 

If  you  will  cease  attacking  it,  we  will  cease  defending 
it, — if  you  no  longer  revile  it,  we  will  no  longer  laud 
it, — if  you  will  stop  circulating  falsehoods  about  it,  we 
will  no  longer  need  to  be  so  active  in  setting  forth  the 
truth  about  it. 

That  in  the  present  state  of  our  Church  in  this  country 
a  great  deal  of  discussion  is  needed,  is  most  certain. 
The  time  is  thronging  with  momentous  questions,  doc- 
trinal and  practical.  To  settle  these  where  men  differ, 
there  must  be  controversy.  Controversy  in  its  own 
nature  is  not  unfriendly,  it  is  simply  the  arraying  of  facts 
and  arguments  by  which  opposite  conclusions  are  main- 
tained, facts  and  arguments  by  which  what  is  believed 
to  be  in  error  is  met,  and  by  which  what  is  believed  to 
be  truth  is  vindicated.  When  good  men  honestly  differ 
and  honestly  argue,  on  purely  speculative  points,  when 
they  are  willing  fairly  to  understand  and  correctly  to 
state  the  positions  of  those  from  whom  they  differ,  they 
may  contend,  and  contend  very  earnestly  for  the  truth 
without  being  alienated  from  each  other. 

77 


78  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIII.. 

When  on  the  other  hand  men  are  mean  and  evasive 
in  their  attempts  to  support  error,  it  is  a  duty  to  expose 
their  dishonesty,  and  to  point  out  to  just  contempt  and 
ridicule  their  vohmtary  and  mischievous  absurdities.  The 
fooHsh  are  so  far  to  be  ansv^ered  according  to  their  folly, 
as  to  prevent  their  being  wise  in  their  ov^rn  conceit. 

All  truth  wins  its  way  by  discussion  in  some  shape. 
Our  Saviour  argued,  his  apostles  argued,  the  Epistles  are 
largely  controversial,  and  the  early  Church  argued;  and 
truth  stated,  and  defended,  was  the  only  way  through 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  subdued  the  world.  Our  Reformers 
were  all  controversialists,  as  Protestants  against  Rome, 
as  Evangelical  against  the  colder  forms  of  heterodoxy, 
and  as  maintainers  of  an  absolutely  Biblical  truth, 
against  such  portions  of  the  nominally  Protestant  and 
Evangelical  communions  as  departed  in  any  respect  from 
what  our  Reformers  believed  to  be  the  doctrine  of  God's 
Word.  The  most  vigorous  controversialist  who  ever 
lived  was  Martin  Luther,  and  because  under  God  this 
warfare  in  which  he  stood  as  the  anvil  to  the  smiter, 
was  a  vigorous  and  uncompromising  one,  the  truth  was- 
triumphant.  To  have  the  truth  and  to  be  willing  to> 
contend  earnestly  for  it  makes  the  heroes  of  the  faith, 
and  such  men  we  need  for  the  hour.      (Nov.  19,  1863.) 

A  noted  phrenologist  once  diagnosed  Dr.  Krauth's. 
mental  frame  as  a  controversialist,  by  ascribing  to  him; 
"Combativeness  without  destructiveness."  And  in  look- 
ing over  the  vast  literature  of  those  years  of  severe 
literary  conflict,  we  find  ample  testimony  for  the  correct- 
ness of  this  diagnosis.  Eager  as  he  was  for  the  battle 
in  defense  of  truth, — for  to  him  "there  is  but  one  thing 
on  earth  worth  having  and  worth  fighting  for,  and  that 
is  truth," — he  was,  at  the  same  time,  always  kind  and 
considerate  toward  the  persons  of  his  antagonists.  How- 
ever keenly  now  and  then,  he  applied  the  ironic  lash,  he 
always  remained  the  "good  humored  writer,"  (See  Dr. 
B.  Kurtz's  statement  in  Vol.  I,  173)  who  only  in  excep- 


1861-6-.]        TOLERATION    AMONG    BRETHREN.  79 

tional  cases,  as  in  his  controversy  with  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown, 
became  really  severe  with  his  antagonist. 

The  spirit  in  which  he  meant  to  conduct  the  warfare 
is  best  illustrated  by  a  few  quotations  from  some  of  his 
leading  articles  in  those  days. 

FORBEARING  ONE  ANOTHER  IN  LOVE. 

Genuine  toleration  is  eminently  characteristic  of  true 
Lutheranism.  No  Church  in  existence  has  such  a 
glorious  record  as  ours,  of  the  successful  resistance  of 
the  temptation  to  persecute. 

Ours  has  been  a  Church  of  earnest  manly  debate— but 
it    has    been    characteristic    of    her,    that    she    separates 
between  error  and  the  errorist— that  when  she  condemns 
men,  it  is  in  their  heresies,  not  in  their  persons,  and  that 
among  errorists  she  carefully  weighs  the  circumstances 
which  mitigate  or  increase  their  culpability.     This  spirit 
of  our  Church  should  not  be  lost  upon  us  in  this  country. 
Great    differences    of    opinion    have    been    temporarily 
exhibited  bv  individuals  in  our  Church,  in  her  European 
history,  and  theological  warfare  was  the  result.     But  the 
battle 'was  decided  with  the  weapons  of  the  Word,  and 
the    whole    membership    of    the    Church    came    to    the 
recognition   of   the  truth.     But  the  battles  of   thought 
requtre  more  time  than  is  needed  for  the  work  of  the 
sword.     Therefore,  the  soldier  of  the  cross  must  learn 
to  wait.     This  lesson  of  waiting  we  must  here  learn. 
Those  whose  devotion  to  the  doctrines  of  our  Church  is 
most  unreserved  and  ardent,  must  not  cease  to  bear  with 
their  brethren  in  the   Church  in   America,   who  claim, 
under    the    unparalleled    circumstances    that    have    sur- 
rounded us,  an  extraordinary  provisional  condition  of 
theological  freedom;  provided  that  they  do  not  ask  the 
right  to  attack  the  doctrines  of  the  Church,  to  attempt  to 
weaken  the  faith  of  others.     In  the  abnormal  condition 
of  our  Church  in  this  country,  there  is  safety  in  no  other 
position  than  in  that  of  great  fraternal  forbearance,  of 
freedom  from  partisanship,  of  a  large,  manly  spirit  of 


8o  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chaf.XUI. 

scriptural  and  historical  investigation.  We  would  not 
discourage,  but  do  all  we  can  to  promote  the  thorough 
examination  of  our  doctrines.  The  most  reviled  of  them 
can  endure  it.  What  we  want  is  that  which  is  so  beauti- 
fully delineated  in  the  Preface  to  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion, "that  in  this  matter  of  religion  the  opinions  and 
judgments  of  diverse  parties  may  be  set  forth  in  each 
other's  hearing,  may  be  understood  and  weighed  between 
them  in  love,  meekness,  and  gentleness,  one  toward 
another,  so  that  those  things  which,  on  either  part,  are 
set  forth  or  understood  otherwise  than  the  Scriptures 
teach,  being  put  aside  and  corrected,  those  things  may  be 
settled,  and  brought  back  to  the  one  pure  truth  and 
Christian  concord;  so  that  henceforth  the  one  pure  and 
true  religion  may  be  cherished  and  preserved  by  us;  so 
that  as  we  are  subjects  and  soldiers  of  the  one  Christ,  we 
may  also  live  in  unity  and  concord  in  the  one  Christian 
Church." 

Our  prayers  and  toils  are  directed  by  the  hope  that  all 
ministers  and  members  of  our  Church  may  one  day  be 
in  body,  soul  and  spirit,  a  unity,  acknowledging  the  faith 
once  delivered  to  the  saints,  and  so  purely  confessed  by 
her,  and  revealing  its  power  in  a  holy  activity,  which  shall 
gladden  the  world.  We  believe,  nay,  we  know,  that  our 
Church  has  the  truth,  and  when  her  children  shall  trust 
her  as  they  should  trust  such  a  mother,  our  family  bond 
will  be  the  most  blessed  and  benignant  which  binds  men 
outwardly  together  on  earth.  In  order  to  secure  this  end, 
we  should  be  willing  to  labor  long  and  endure  much. 
Desirable  as  it  would  be  for  all  of  us  to  see  eye  to  eye, 
and  to  be  able  to  accept,  without  reservation,  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  as  a  system  of  doctrine,  we  should  not 
attempt  to  hasten  this  result  by  violent  legislation,  by 
prescription  or  proscription.  If  it  please  God  to  bring 
it  about,  we  are  satisfied  that  it  will  be  done  under  the 
influence  of  calm  counsels,  of  uncontrolled  investigation, 
of  the  largest  forbearance  consistent  with  bearing  the 
name  and  confessing  the  faith  of  our  Church.  The 
power  which  destroys  a  Church  is  that  which  bursts  up 


1861-67.]  NOT  AGAIXST  THE  TRUTH.  81 

from  the  great  deep  of  human  passion,  in  a  dekige  of 
angry  personal  controversy.  The  power  that  freshens 
her  into  a  new  hfe.  "comes  down  as  rain  upon  the  mown 
grass — as  showers  that  water  the  earth." 

HE   THAT   IS   NOT   AGAINST   US  IS  ON    OUR   PART.        (Mark 

ix.  40.) 

There  are  men  in  our  Church  in  America  who  are  not 
positive  in  their  convictions  on  all  points  of  Lutheran 
doctrine,  but  who  are  reverential,  and  are  sincere. 
Never  do  they  assail  the  doctrines  of  our  Church ;  they 
look  upon  such  a  course  with  horror;  they  regard  the 
departure  from  the  faith  as  in  itself  abnormal  and  deplor- 
able, and  they  do  not  labor  to  perpetuate  it.  Such  men 
are  sometimes,  just  as  suits  the  ends  of  false  Lutherans, 
assailed,  on  the  one  side,  as  covert  Symbolists,  or  claimed, 
on  the  other,  as  sympathizers  with  fanaticism.  They 
are  neither.  They  are  men  of  God  who,  in  a  wonderful 
Providence,  whose  issues  are  now  fast  ripening,  are  in  a 
Church  which  they  love,  although  the  influences  of  early 
education  have  fixed  certain  difficulties  in  regard  to  her 
doctrines  in  their  minds.  Their  hearts  are  with  our 
Church  as  a  mother.  Their  sympathies  and  hopes  are 
with  those  who  are  striving  to  defend  her.  They  wish 
that  what  are  charged  upon  her  as  blemishes  may  prove 
to  be  beauties.  Such  men  are  not  fully  against  the  truth, 
and,  therefore,  are,  in  an  important  sense,  on  its  part. 
Amid  the  confusion  into  which  the  zealotry  and  rage  of 
baffled  conspiracy  brings  part  of  the  Church,  they  may 
seem  for  a  time  to  be  in  dubious  relation  to  men  and 
things  they  abhor,  but  they  cannot  long  even  seem  to 
countenance  what  is  so  alien  to  their  true  mind.  May 
they  come  to  the  full  truth  and  an  open  confession  of  it, 
that  they  may  fully  stand  where  their  spirit  inclines 
them,  leaving  error  without  even  the  poor  cloak  which  it 
makes  of  an  abuse  of  their  position.  Then  will  all  the 
real  weight  of  the  Church  be  cast  together,  Zion  will 
have  peace,  and  will  move  rejoicingly  to  that  inevitable 
6 


32  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chav.XUL 

consummation  towards  which  she  is  now  struggHng  with 
a  mourning  heart. 

Probably  the  most  beautiful  and  striking  testimony  of 
Dr.  Krauth's  disposition  and  his  constant  anxiety  to  dis- 
tinguish between  the  error  and  the  errorist  is  his  generous 
tribute  to  his  fiercest  opponent,  Dr.  B.  Kurtz,  in  a 
review  of  Dr.  E.  W.  Hutter's  Eulogy  on  the  Life  and 
Character  of  Rev.  Benjamin  Kurtz,  D.  D.,  LL.  D., 
delivered  at  Selinsgrove,  Pa.,  May  28,  1866: 

Dr.  Kurtz's  greatest  merit  was  that  which  in  kind  is 
the  greatest  that  any  man  can  have — it  was  that  he  was 
a  man,  even  his  infirmities  were  manly.  He  was  not 
womanish,  nor  babyish,  nor  childish.  He  aroused  every 
feeling  of  aversion  except  that  of  contempt.  He  was  a 
man  of  more  than  ordinary  intellect  and  force,  but  Dr. 
Hutter  diminishes  the  reader's  impression  in  regard  even 
to  this  by  claiming  that  his  hero  would  have  been  a  Grant 
or  Sherman  in  war,  a  Marshall  on  the  bench,  a  Webster 
in  statesmanship.  We  shall  not  undertake  to  prove  that 
he  would  not.  It  is  comparatively  difiticult  to  tell  what  a 
man,  who  has  risen  or  failed  in  one  pursuit,  would  have 
become  in  some  other.  It  is  easier  to  tell  what  he  became 
in  his  own.  Dr.  Kurtz,  in  his  palmiest  days,  was,  beyond 
all  question,  a  good  preacher,  but  he  was  not  a  Chalmers 
nor  a  Mason.  His  mind  was  essentially  partisan,  not 
judicial.  He  would  have  made  an  admirable  lawyer,  but 
a  dangerous  judge.  He  had  no  claim  to  extensive  learn- 
ing. He  was  not  a  master  of  theology.  He  knew  little 
of  Church  polity;  his  principle  of  "elective  affinity,"  and 
his  practices  showed  the  crudeness  of  his  views.  He 
had,  undoubtedly,  power  as  a  popular  religious  writer; 
but  he  never  elevated  the  taste  of  those  for  whom  he 
wrote.  He  wrote  to  it  as  it  was,  and  always  was  severe 
upon  styles  and  modes  of  thought  which  rose  above  his 
own.  His  own  vein  was  one  of  practical  force,  a  sort  of 
spiritualized  worldly  prudence,  in  that  happy  average  of 
the   good  every   day   qualities   which   makes   a   popular 


i866.]  DR.   B.   KURTZ.  83 

writer.  He  settled  nothing  that  was  unsettled,  and 
happily  could  not  go  deep  enough  long  to  unsettle  any 
thing  that  was  settled.  His  strength,  as  a  thinker,  was 
his  common  sense ;  his  weakness  was,  that  he  did  not 
comprehend  that  common  sense  is  only  good  for  common 
things,  that  every  body  has  a  common  sense  of  his  own, 
or  thinks  he  has,  and  that  there  is  much  which  no  man's 
common  sense,  nor  all  the  common  sense  in  the  world  can 
settle.  One  most  extraordinary  feature  of  Dr.  Kurtz's 
mind  was  the  perverse  character  of  its  sensibility  to  testi- 
mony. He  did  not  believe  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  and  expressed  doubts  as  to  the  eternal 
Sonship  of  Christ,  but  he  believed  in  mesmeric  clairvoy- 
ance. When  he  first  visited  the  magnetic  telegraph  he 
expressed  a  suspicion  that  the  whole  thing  was  a  hoax. 
He  was  far  more  impressed  by  any  thing  he  saw,  or 
thought  he  saw,  than  by  any  amount  of  mere  testimony. 
He  could  see  the  clairvoyants,  and  hear  from  their  own 
lips  what  they  professed  to  view  at  the  moment;  but  he 
could  not  see  the  telegraphic  message  flying  along  the 
wires,  nor  could  he  touch  Christ  in  His  supernatural  pres- 
ence, nor  fathom  eternal  Sonship,  and  so  he  would  none  of 
them.  In  a  word,  he  was  unconsciously  rationalistic  in 
his  mode  of  thought. 

It  ought  never  to  be  forgotten,  in  any  generous  esti- 
mate of  Dr.  Kurtz,  that  a  very  large  part  of  his  life  was 
one  of  great  pain,  and  nervous  prostration  and  excite- 
ment. In  his  moods  of  involuntary  irritation  he  was 
wholly  different  from  his  pleasanter  self.  This  he  felt 
and  confessed.  "See  here,"  he  once  said  to  a  young 
friend,  as  he  handed  him  a  manuscript,  "what  a  bitter 
thing  I  have  written.  I  am  glad  it  has  not  gone  into 
print.  The  fact  is,  I  had  had  a  hemorrhage — I  was 
nervous  and  excitable  beyond  measure,  and  so  I  wrote 
what  you  see."  A  few  weeks  after,  there  must  have 
been  a  return  of  the  feelings  which  inspired  the  article; 
for  it  appeared  (not  as  an  editorial)  with  a  handful  or 
so  more  of  aloes  mixed  in.  To  the  source  of  which  we 
speak  is  to  be  imputed,  in  part,  the  polemical  character 


84  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XllL 

of  the  Observer.  Its  attacks  were  constant.  Hardly  a 
week  passed  that  there  was  not  a  new  victim  served  up, 
or  an  old  one  tortured  afresh.  Dr.  Kurtz  never  wrote 
so  vigorously  as  when  he  was  scathing  some  one.  In 
those  halcyon  days  of  universal  church  love  and  peace, 
which  are  poetically  supposed  to  have  preceded  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  Lutheran,  the  Observer  was,  in  fact, 
a  "dark  and  bloody  ground"  of  ferocious  warfare.  The 
influence  of  the  Lutheran  has  tended  to  restrain  com- 
batants, to  defend  truth  and  innocence,  to  lead  to  the 
discussion  of  principles,  and  to  bring  necessary  conflict, 
from  beneath  the  traditions  of  the  tomahawk  and  scalping 
knife,  and  to  put  it  under  the  laws  of  nations  and  of 
honorable  warfare.  In  his  most  genial  times,  Dr.  Kurtz 
was  one  of  the  most  agreeable  of  men ;  he  could  take  rank 
with  the  finest  conversers;  there  was  wisdom  and  wit  in 
his  words,  and  something  very  winning  in  his  manners. 
Under  some  circumstances,  there  was,  without  the  slight- 
est tinge  of  affectation  (a  weak  vice  which  no  man  could 
impute  to  him,)  something  almost  courtly  in  his  carriage. 
The  unquestionable,  direct  influence  which  Dr.  Kurtz 
exercised  was  due  certainly  as  much  to  the  love  and 
admiration,  as  to  the  fear  he  inspired. 

As  regards  his  own  repose,  and  the  undivided  regard 
of  the  Church,  it  was  a  great  misfortune  to  Dr.  Kurtz, 
as  it  is  indeed  to  any  man  of  strong  character,  to  be  in 
the  editorial  chair.  The  editor's  enemy  always  has  Job's 
unfulfilled  desire  gratified.  The  editor's  life  is  spent  in 
writing  the  book  which  the  art  of  Faust  (we  sometimes 
think  that  Mephistopheles  suggested  it  to  him)  graves 
with  more  than  the  iron  pen  and  lead  in  the  rock.  His 
excitements  and  depressions  are  chronicled.  He  is  like 
the  birds  of  the  geologist,  which  have  left  the  marks  of 
every  step  in  mud,  which  turned  to  stone.  Dr.  Kurtz 
changed  in  view  and  tone  on  many  points — to  continue 
a  leader  he  had  to  become  a  follower ;  but  he  had  a  pride 
of  consistency,  and  attempted  the  hopeless  task  of  adjust- 
ing his  relative  conservatism  to  his  later  absolute  radical- 
ism.    Dr.  Hutter  repeats  the  explanation  of  what  cannot 


i866.]  DR.    B.    KURTZ.  85 

be  explained,  and  renews  the  attempt  to  harmonize  what 
cannot  be  harmonized.  It  would  be  an  ungracious  task 
and  an  unnecessary  one  to  show  that  it  would  have  been 
better  to  have  left  the  whole  thing  untouched.  The  true 
question — the  only  one  which  need  concern  the  lover  of 
truth — is  not  whether  he  thinks  now  as  he  once  thought, 
but  whether  he  now  thinks  right. 

"  Let  the  dead  past  bury  its  dead." 

Dr.  Kurtz  did  make  the  Observer  a  power;  and  its 
power  was,  at  one  time,  for  some  things  a  good  one.  It 
helped  to  develop  some  disposition  for  reading,  aroused 
to  a  certain  point  a  sluggish  Church,  which  had  declined 
from  the  faith;  but  even  when  it  did  most  good,  it  mis- 
took a  tendency  half  developed  for  a  final  result ;  it  turned 
to  battle  with  its  better  self,  and  devoted  its  latest  energies 
to  preventing  the  logical  consummation  of  its  better 
earliest  work.  In  its  best  day  it  mixed  up  with  its  good 
an  enormous  amount  of  the  questionable  and  of  the  evil, 
and  finally  became  the  instrument  of  unmitigated  mis- 
chief. Providentially,  it  fell  into  the  hands  of  gentle- 
men, who,  starting  with  the  humble  confession  of  Dr. 
Kurtz's  sins,  (and  never  do  we  so  heartily  confess  any 
sins,  as  those  of  other  people)  soon  plunged  headlong 
into  worse  than  his  worst.  These  new  Editors  floundered 
hopelessly,  ate  each  other  up  virtually,  distracted  and  dis- 
organized their  own  party,  disgusted  all  conservative 
men  with  their  radicalism,  and  all  the  radicals  with  their 
awkward  apologetic  conservatism,  and  all  honest  men  of 
all  schools,  with  their  twistings,  windings,  explanations, 
evasions,  invisibly  fine  points,  and  extraordinary  tertium 
quids,  which  were  designed  to  escape  the  extravagance  of 
the  party  who  asserted,  at  one  extreme,  that  twice  two 
are  not  four,  and  of  the  "symbolists,"  who  asserted,  at 
the  other,  that  twice  two  are  four. 

Never  was  it  more  manifest  how  invaluable  Dr.  Kurtz 
had  been  to  the  party  he  guided,  than  when  the  reins 
were  committed  to  the  ambitious  Phaethons  who  were 
confident  they  could  manage  the  chariot  better  than  the 


86  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XUl. 

old  driver,  but  who  were  run  away  with,  and  tumbled 
into  a  dark  and  muddy  river,  from  which  a  stock  com- 
pany is  now  trying  to  fish  them  out,  with  the  design  of 
putting  a  break  on  the  chariot,  twelve  cords  on  the 
drivers,  and  snaffle  bits  on  the  coursers  of  the  East  and 
the  West.  Dr.  Kurtz  had  the  full  confidence  of  the  mass 
of  his  party.  He  knew  how  to  control  them  beyond  a 
certain  point,  by  allowing  them  to  control  him  up  to  that 
point.  They  knew  where  he  stood,  and  were  sure  that 
in  the  battle  he  would  be  with  them.  If  he  was  not  per- 
fectly consistent  with  himself  at  different  eras,  he  at 
least  never  occupied  two  positions  at  one  time.  He  was 
plain  and  out-spoken,  and  rarely  attempted  to  evade  the 
fair  inferences  from  his  premises.  Whatever  power  the 
paper  he  edited  so  long  may  now  have,  is  traditional. 
Nobody  pretends  to  love  it  for  what  it  is ;  most  continue 
to  take  it  from  the  time  when  they  took  it,  for  what  it 
was,  and  a  few  hold  on  to  it  for  what  they  hope  it  is  going 
to  be. 

As  a  professor,  Dr.  Kurtz's  success  was  less  marked, 
Selinsgrove  was  the  accident  of  his  plan,  not  the  issue 
of  it.  Had  he  foreseen  that  it  would  be  the  last  step,  he 
never  would  have  taken  the  first  one. 

Dr.  Hutter's  vindication  of  Dr.  Kurtz's  claim  to  be  a 
consistent  Lutheran,  all  turns  upon  a  false  conception  of 
what  constitutes  a  Lutheran.  He  is  a  Lutheran  in  the 
true  sense,  who  holds  the  distinctive  faith  of  the  Lutheran 
Church.  This  Dr.  Kurtz  did  not  hold  in  all  its  parts. 
In  his  latest  years,  he  spent  nearly  all  his  energies  in 
combating  what  he  maintained  was  part  of  the  confessed 
faith  of  that  Church.  He  was  one  of  the  authors  of  the 
Definite  Platform,  and  it  is  to  his  honor  that  he  was  the 
first  to  avow  his  relation  to  it,  and  that  he  never  aban- 
doned it,  maintaining  as  he  did,  incontrovertibly,  that  the 
"American  Lutherans"  who  opposed  it,  differed  from 
those  who  upheld  it,  only  in  lack  either  of  consistency  or 
of  honesty.  And  yet  so  careless  was  he  in  investigating 
the  documents  on  which  he  professed  to  pronounce  judg- 
ment,  that   he   insisted   that   the   Augsburg   Confession 


i866.]  DR.   B.   KURTZ.  87 

enjoined  exorcism.  The  truth  was,  Dr.  K.  knew  exceed- 
ingly Httle  about  the  Confessions  and  theologians  of  the 
Lutheran  Church.  His  acquaintance  with  books  was 
that  of  a  reader,  and  that  sort  of  acquaintance  was  large 
and  varied.  It  was  not  at  all  that  of  a  student,  and  his 
favorite  books  were  not  those  of  profound  theology. 
He  neither  had  deep  root  in  the  past,  nor  deep  insight 
into  the  future.  He  did  not  move  in  the  thoughts  of 
those  who  went  before  him,  nor  leave  much  in  which  men 
are  likely  to  move  after  him.  He  was  a  man  of  the 
present,  and  a  large  part  of  his  work  was  passing  away 
before  he  died.  Though  his  works  display  popular  apti- 
tude, and  were  generally  well  received  by  those  for  whom 
they  were  meant,  none  of  them  show  thorough  investiga- 
tion. Where  they  show  research,  it  is  the  research  of 
others. 

But  he  is  gone — gone,  we  trust,  through  the  infinite 
grace  of  our  adorable  Saviour,  into  a  world  where  every 
film  is  removed  from  the  eye,  every  imperfection  from 
the  soul.  Weak  or  bad  men  have  tried  to  make  capital 
for  the  wrong,  by  representing  us  as  an  enemy  of  Dr. 
Kurtz.  Dr.  Kurtz  himself  knew  better.  Even  when  he 
was  bearing  part  in  a  cruel  persecution  in  which  radical- 
ism was  attempting  to  destroy  us  for  the  crime  of  fidelity 
to  duty,  we  had  no  spark  of  personal  hostility  to  him. 
When  in  the  controversy  into  which,  to  our  deep  pain,  he 
had  thrust  himself,  his  better  nature  was  aroused,  and  he 
wrote  to  implore  us  to  desist;  we  gladly  consented  to 
cease  to  defend  the  truth  against  his  attacks,  on  the  sole 
condition  that  he  would  cease  from  fresh  attacks  upon 
the  truth.  When  he  afterwards  forgot  himself  so  far 
as  to  renew  his  assaults  in  the  most  wanton  and  offensive 
manner,  we  replied  to  them  reluctantly  and  sparingly. 
When  he  wrote  an  Introduction  to  Dr.  Sternberg's 
defense  of  an  assailant  of  the  Lutheran  Church  against 
us,  who  had  met  those  groundless  charges,  we  replied  to 
both  with  something  of  that  plainness  of  speech  which 
Dr.  Kurtz  always  professed  to  admire,  and  in  which  no 
man  went  further  than  himself.     All  our  relations  to  him 


88  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XUI. 

in  controversy  were  purely  defensive.  But  let  all  that 
pass.  Truth  lives  in  spite  of  the  strength  of  its  assail- 
ants, and  of  the  feebleness  of  its  defenders,  and  every 
cause  w^hich  has  abiding  might,  has  it  in  itself,  and  not  in 
men.  It  w^as  made  Dr.  Hutter's  vv^ork  and  duty  to  w^rite 
the  Eulogy  of  Dr.  Kurtz.  He  has  done  it  from  a  full 
heart.  He  was  the  right  man  to  do  it;  he  loved  and 
revered  him;  what  he  says  of  him  in  this  address,  he  has 
said  of  him  privately,  very  often,  and  very  warmly.  It 
has  been  made  our  work  and  duty  to  say,  as  a  truthful 
man,  what  we  think  of  the  Eulogy  and  of  him  who  is 
the  subject  of  it.  As  one  who  long  enjoyed  an  intimate 
acquaintance  with  Dr.  Kurtz,  and  who  could  appreciate 
his  virtues  without  being  blind  to  his  faults,  we  have 
exercised  the  right  to  speak  frankly  of  him.  We  never 
had  a  particle  of  animosity  to  him:  if  we  ever  had,  it 
would  have  expired  with  the  first  knowledge  of  the  deep 
grief  which  bowed  his  aged  head,  and  went  down  with 
him  to  his  grave.  If  we  stood  with  his  Eulogist  at  that 
grave,  we  are  sure  that  the  tear  would  not  start  more 
freshly  to  his  eye  than  to  our  own ;  and  when  we  are 
gone,  we  ask  of  our  dearest  friend  no  more  than  that  he 
shall  feel  as  gently  to  our  infirmities,  as  kindly  to  our 
virtues,  as  we  feel  to  the  faults  and  excellencies  of 
Benjamin  Kurtz. 

It  is  all  in  the  same  spirit  in  which,  on  another  occasion, 
in  the  midst  of  fiery  controversy,  he  had  said  of  his  aged 
antagonist :  "We  do  reverence  age,  but  we  reverence 
truth  much  more ;  and  when  age,  instead  of  gracing  its 
hoary  head  with  the  crown  of  truth,  tramples  it  under 
foot,  we  kneel  to  lift  the  crown  from  the  dust,  rather 
than  to  do  homage  to  the  head  which  dishonors  it." 

But  while  Dr.  Krauth  was  always  willing  to  treat  per- 
sons who  differed  from  his  standpoint  with  all  due  con- 
sideration, he  could  never  close  his  eyes  to  the  importance 
of  the  principles  that  were  at  stake,  and  to  the  great 
danger  for  the  Church  wherever  error  was  admitted  into 


i865.]  THE   PROGRESS    OF   ERROR.  89 

it.     He    pointed    out    that    there    were    generally    three 
stages  to  be  found  in  its  insidious  progress. 

It  begins  by  asking  toleration.  Its  friends  say  to  the 
majority:  You  need  not  be  afraid  of  us;  we  are  a  few, 
and  weak ;  only  let  us  alone ;  we  shall  not  disturb  the  faith 
of  others.  The  Church  has  her  standards  of  doctrine; 
of  course  we  shall  never  interfere  with  them ;  we  only  ask 
for  ourselves  to  be  spared  interference  with  our  private 
opinions. 

Indulged  in  this  for  a  time,  error  goes  on  to  assert  equal 
rights.  Truth  and  error  are  two  balancing  forces.  The 
Church  shall  do  nothing  which  looks  like  deciding  between 
them;  that  would  be  partiality.  It  is  bigotry  to  assert 
any  superior  right  for  the  truth.  We  are  to  agree  to 
differ,  and  any  favoring  of  the  truth,  because  it  is  truth, 
is  partisanship.  What  the  friends  of  truth  and  error 
hold  in  common  is  fundamental.  Any  thing  on  which 
they  differ  is  ipso  facto  non-essential.  Any  body  who 
makes  account  of  such  a  thing  is  a  disturber  of  the  peace 
•of  the  Church.  Truth  and  error  are  two  co-ordinal 
powers,  and  the  great  secret  of  church-statesmanship  is 
to  preserve  the  balance  between  them. 

From  this  point  error  soon  goes  on  to  its  natural  end, 
which  is  to  assert  supremacy.  Truth  started  with  tolerat- 
ing; it  comes  to  be  merely  tolerated,  and  that  only  for  a 
time.  Error  claims  a  preference  for  its  judgments  on  all 
•disputed  points.  It  puts  men  into  positions  not  in  spite 
of  their  departure  from  the  Church's  faith,  but  in  conse- 
•quence  of  it.  Their  recommendation  is  that  they  repudi- 
ate that  faith,  and  position  is  given  them  to  teach  others 
to  repudiate  it,  and  to  make  them  skilful  in  combating  it.* 

This  has  been  the  history  of  rationalism  in  our  Church 
in  Europe  and  in  this  country.  It  is  the  struggle  against 
it  in  its  third  shape,  its  effort  at  supremacy,  which  has 
"been  going  on  for  some  years  among  us.  Like  the  slave- 
power,  it  has  at  length  aroused  good  men  against  it,  who 
in  their  love  of  peace  not  only  had  tolerated  it,  but  would 

*  Conservative  Reformation,  p.  195  f. 


go  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chaf.XUI. 

have  endured  even  its  claim  for  equal  rights.  To  keep 
it  at  that  second  point  was  their  aim  years  ago,  but  time 
and  providence  have  made  them  wiser.  You  might  as 
well  expect  a  tiger-cub  to  remain  a  cub,  as  for  error  not 
to  grow  bigger  and  more  exacting.  Every  man  sees  now 
that  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  faith,  and  the  bald  and 
pie-bald  rationalism,  which  is  attempting  to  supplant  it, 
cannot  permanently  co-exist  in  harmony.  Both  cannot 
be  supreme;  both  cannot  assert  harmoniously  equal 
rights;  both  cannot  wisely  be  tolerated  as  the  normal 
condition  of  the  same  communion.  If  the  faith  of  our 
fathers  is  that  abominable  thing  which  its  opponents,  who 
take  its  name  to  stab  it  to  the  heart,  pretend  it  is,  they 
are  dishonest  men,  on  their  own  showing,  and  have  all 
along  been  such,  in  pretending  to  tolerate  it.  They 
ought  to  root  it  out  utterly,  if  it  be  half  as  bad  as  they 
pretend  to  think  it.  On  the  other  hand,  if  that  rational- 
ism, which  tampers  with  so  much  of  the  faith  as  it  may 
suit  this  or  that  man  for  his  private  convenience  to  tamper 
with,  in  the  prerogative  of  which  one  man  throws  away 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  in  whole  or  in  part,  and  another 
is  satisfied  with  a  due  share  of  mild-drawn  Pelagianism ; 
if  this  be  the  dangerous  thing  Evangelical  Lutherans 
believe  it  to  be,  they  ought  not  to  countenance  or  connive 
at  it,  in  its  third,  second  or  first  stage.  It  is  its  attitude  of 
effort  after  supremacy,  in  contending  for  which  it  has 
openly  seceded  from  the  faith  of  the  Church,  and  has  in 
all  the  varied  shapes  of  schism  carried  on  its  cruel  war 
within  the  Church.  But  it  must  not  only  be  pushed  back 
from  this  third  stage,  but  pushed  back  from  equal  rights, 
and  from  toleration.  Unless  we  would  have  the  whole 
growth  over,  we  must  cut  it  up  by  the  root.  Connivance 
at  error  is  intolerance  towards  truth. 

When  we  speak,  however,  of  pushing  back,  we  mean 
not  by  proscription,  but  by  the  avoidance  of  entangling 
alliances,  alien  to  fidelity  to  the  truth,  and  by  the  asser- 
tion and  maintenance  of  sound  principles,  until  the  Church 
is  ripe  for  such  action  as  shall  put  her  right,  and  keep  her 
right,  by  God's  blessing,  forever.     To  have  two  faiths  is- 


i865.]  WIT  AXD   HUMOR   GIFTS    OF  GOD.  91 

the  bud  of  having  no  faith ;  the  error  is  the  cancer  of  the 
truth.  If  we  would  not  have  perpetual  warfare  in  the 
Church,  we  must  recognize  and  stand  firm  to  the  truth, 
that  there  is  but  "one  faith,"  and  that  our  Church,  by 
God's  mercy,  has  got  it.      (June  9,  1865.) 

The  propriety  and  duty  of  caustic  criticism,  of  "a 
sanctified  bitterness"  that  would  freely  use  the  weapons 
of  wit  and  humor  against  the  enemies  of  truth  is  thus 
forcibly  set  forth : 

Gentlemen    with    velvet    cuticles    would    better    keep 

themselves  out  of  print.     Critics  should,  indeed,  cultivate 

amenity.     Every    man,    nevertheless,    must    be    himself. 

Some  men  lay  down  their  own  temperament,  their  own 

inclinations,  their  own  defects,  as  a  canon   for  others. 

They  will  allow  no  sparkle  of  imagination  in  others,  if 

they  themselves  are  dull.     If  they  are  lugubrious,  a  laugh 

(which   a    man    can    sometimes   take   very    heartily    on 

paper,)     is    unpardonable.     Nevertheless,    the    play    of 

humor  and  the  felicities  of  wit,  are  the  great  weapons  by 

which  the  kingdom  of  the  ridiculous  is  kept  down — a 

kingdom  which  would  soon  cover  every  other,  if  it  were 

not  held  in  check.     The  argument  for  creative  design 

from  the  existence  of  wit,  is  just  as  strong,  as  from  any 

other  case  of  adaptation.     Wit  was  as  certainly  created 

to  keep  down  nonsense,  as  cats  were  created  to  keep  down 

mice.     Wit  may  indeed  get  out  of  its  sphere  as  a  cat  may 

get  out  of  hers.     When  Tabby  assails  the  sublime  of  roast 

beef,  and  dares  to  lay  paw  upon  the  Christmas  turkey. 

she  is  justly  put  under  the  regimen  of  another  cat  with  as 

many  tails  as  puss  has  lives.     When  wit  gets  out  of  its 

province  and  touches  what  belongs  to  a  holier  domain,  it 

deserves  a  scourging  from  incensed  virtue ;  but  the  devil 

of  a  profane  or  immoral  wit.  must  be  fought  with  the  fire 

of  a  true  wit.  and  never  is  the  scourging  of  a  false  or 

misdirected  wit  more  terrible  than  when  it  comes  from 

a  true  wit  regulated  by  principle ;  for  wit.  like  all  other 

gifts  of  God,  can  be  sanctified  and  used  for  His  glory  and 

the  welfare  of  man. 


92  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Cuap.XUI. 

It  is  not  sharpness  of  the  wrong  kind  to  wither  false 
reasoning  with  true  logic,  to  overthrow  groundless 
assumption  with  well-established  facts,  and  to  show  the 
exceeding  absurdity  of  the  absurd.  The  tone  in  which 
the  objectionable  writings  and  doings  of  men  are  noticed, 
may  indeed  be  somewhat  conditioned  by  the  character  of 
the  men  and  their  tone.  Those  who  observe  the  grace 
of  discussion,  are  entitled  to  the  benefit  of  it;  and  those 
who  are  coarse  and  proscriptive,  deserve  to  be  treated 
more  roughly;  for  in  writing,  as  in  every  other  sphere, 
there  is  to  be  law  and  justice  as  well  as  love.  "With  the 
froward,"  says  the  Psalmist,  "thou  wilt  show  thyself 
froward." 

There  is  a  sharpness,  indeed,  which  under  some  cir- 
cumstances, becomes  a  moral  duty.  It  is  expressly 
enjoined  by  Saint  Paul,  who  after  giving  a  specimen  of 
severity  of  the  most  downright  kind,  urges  Titus  to  an 
equally  honest  handling  of  errorists, — "Rebuke  them 
sharply,"  he  says,  "that  they  may  be  sound  in  the  faith." 
The  man  who  thinks  that  wrong  can  be  tickled  into 
virtue,  and  who  is  interested  in  seeing  how  the  Apostles 
handled  the  weapons  of  controversy,  might  with  profit 
read  the  first  chapter  of  Titus  and  follow  it  up  with  a 
general  glance  at  the  Epistles.  The  sacred  writers  cer- 
tainly never  made  themselves  partakers  in  other  men's 
sins  and  errors,  by  want  of  explicitness  in  pointing  them 
out  and  denouncing  them.  But  never  has  a  holy  severity 
been  more  unreserved  in  its  language,  than  in  the  case 
of  our  Lord  Himself.  His  detestation  of  evil  was  intensi- 
fied by  His  love ;  for  in  proportion  as  we  love  will  be  the 
earnestness  of  our  indignation  at  that  which  subverts 
and  destroys  what  we  love. 

But  it  may  be  urged  that  holy  men,  and  most  of  all  our 
Master,  spoke  these  words  of  "sharp  rebuke,"  under  the 
impulse  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Most  High,  whose  gifts 
are  not  imparted  to  us  in  the  measure  in  which  they 
possessed  them.  To  this  we  can  give  no  better  reply 
than  that  of  Milton :  "Ye  will  say,  these  had  immediate 
warrant  from  God  to  be  thus  bitter;  and  I  say,  so  much 


1 862.]  PROVIDENCE    AXD    PEPPER.  93 

the  plainer  is  it  found  that  there  may  be  a  sanctified 
bitterness  against  the  enemies  of  the  truth."  (March 
30,  1865.) 

With  what  good  humor,  on  the  other  hand  he  himself 
was  ready  to  take  the  attacks  of  his  enemies,  appears 
from  the  following : 

SAUCE  PIQUANTE  ;  OR  HOW  TO  ENJOY  BEING  ABUSED. 

There  is  nothing  in  the  way  of  sauce  piquante  which 
we  so  much  relish,  as  being  roundly  abused,  provided 
that  the  abuse  has  certain  characteristics.  In  the  first 
place,  to  the  thorough  enjoyment  of  it,  it  is  essential  that 
you  get  it  for  having  done  your  duty.  It  is  one  way  in 
which  Providence  rewards  you  for  doing  right,  for  it 
gives  you  an  immediate  and  unmistakable  evidence  that 
your  work  has  not  been  in  vain.  The  praises  of  the  good 
may  be  mistaken,  but  the  vindictiveness  of  the  bad  is 
unerring. 

Then,  the  abuse  must  be  hearty ;  the  more  fierce  and 
furious  the  better,  for  just  to  the  extent  it  is  such,  is  the 
evidence  that  what  you  have  done  for  good  has  been 
effectively  done.  Then,  it  must  lose  sight  of  all  the 
questions  that  have  been  really  involved,  for  in  this  case 
you  feel  that  it  confesses  that  it  cannot  grapple  with 
them.  It  is  especially  delightful  when  the  whole  fury 
of  it  falls  on  yourself,  and  the  truth  you  have  defended 
is  spared.  It  has  a  peculiar  charm  too  when  it  gets  away 
from  everything  you  have  ever  done,  or  said,  or  written, 
about  which  people  may  know  something,  and  charges 
upon  you  motives  about  which  nobody  can  possibly  know 
anything,  as  it  thus  confesses  that  malignity  can  do 
nothing  against  you  with  what  it  knows,  and  has  to  fall 
back  upon  what  it  imagines 

But  one  caution.  Mustard  does  not  suit  young  and 
tender  mouths.  We  do  not  recommend  this  highly 
flavored  sauce  to  everybody.  You  may  be  weary  of 
praise,  satiated  with  flattery,  sighing  for  a  new  sensation, 
with  something  rough  in  it  to  stir  a  languid  palate,  and 


94  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XIU. 

you  may  imagine  that  it  is  just  the  thing.  But  be 
cautious.  Before  you  commit  yourself  to  it  ponder  the 
question  well,  whether  you  would  not  enjoy  better  some- 
thing mild  and  emulcent,  say,  a  little  arrow-root  pap,  or 
barley  gruel,  or  a  few  raw  Chincoteagues  on  the  half 
shell?  But  if  you  are  sure  you  would  like  it,  if  you 
know  that  you  are  proof  against  slanders,  simply  and 
solely  because  they  are  slanders ;  proof  against  them  even 
though  many  should  utter  them  and  a  few  believe  them, 
then  out  with  the  truth  about  some  miserable  humbug  of 
the  hour,  put  your  finger  through  some  soft-soap  bubble 
of  hypocrisy,  let  fall  a  drop  of  ink  on  somebody's  sham, 
and  you  shall  have  a  new  and  exquisite  enjoyment.  Your 
sauce  will  be  well  shaken  so  as  to  distribute  the  hot 
particles  all  through  it,  and  you  shall  have  plenty  of  it. 

(October  9,  1862.) 

Apart  from  the  question  of  objective  truth  as  held  and 
confessed  by  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  Dr. 
Krauth  insisted  in  the  whole  controversy  on  that  sub- 
jective personal  truthfulness  and  honesty  which  demand 
that,  under  no  circumstances,  men  should  give  themselves 
false  names,  calling  themselves  what  they  are  not  in 
reality.  Such  indirectness,  artfulness  and  mental 
reservation  are  unworthy  of  a  true  nobility  even  of  unre- 
generate  nature,  and  entirely  at  war  with  a  Christian 
character,  and  "what  form  of  deception,"  he  asks,  "can 
be  more  thoroughly  criminal,  than  the  wearing  of  a  name 
which  tells  what  we  are  not  ?" 

If  we  call  ourselves  Lutheran  we  must  be  Lutherans. 
If  we  are  not,  our  name  is  certainly  a  mistake;  and  if  we 
know  that  we  are  not,  our  name  is  a  falsehood.  Dr. 
Krauth  points  out  that  even  in  this  subjective  aspect  the 
Lutheran  Church  is,  and  always  has  been,  characterized 
by  an  outspoken  honesty,  thoroughly  averse  to  any  kind 
of  duplicity  and  compromise. 

The  German  character  is  proverbially  an  honest  one. 


i862.]  HONESTY    OR    DUPLICITY^  95 

Even  where  it  is  wrong,  it  is  still  honest.  Saclclucean, 
rationalistic,  unbelieving  it  may  become  under  pernicious 
influences ;  but  Pharisaic,  hypocritical,  cunning,  it  cannot 
be.  The  Lutheran  Church  is,  in  her  essential  nature,  an 
honest  Church.  Read  her  history  and  you  will  And  that 
her  bitterest  trials  have  arisen  from  the  fact  that  she 
would  not  endure  double  meanings,  the  twistings  to  which 
subtle  and  dishonest  criticism  subjects  words.  One 
mind,  one  heart,  giving  themselves  voice  in  terms  of 
unmistakable  meaning,  were  the  demands  she  made  for 
unity.  She  stood  Athanasius-like  for  this,  against  the 
world.  Had  she  demanded  less,  had  she  been  willing  to 
practice  that  syncretism  which  has  been  the  external 
strength  and  internal  weakness  of  the  Church  of  England, 
she  might,  perhaps,  have  had  all  Protestant  Europe 
nominally  Lutheran ;  she  might  have  been  a  more  splen- 
did, a  more  wealthy,  a  more  potent  church  politically,  and 
all  simply  at  the  price  of  a  little  duplicity.  Zwingli 
desired  above  all  things  to  have  fellowship  with  the  Wit- 
tenbergers.  Calvin  joyously  signed  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession, and  acted  in  the  capacity  of  a  Lutheran  minister ; 
Reformed  churches  insisted  that  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion was  also  their  Confession.  Why  did  not,  why 
could  not  our  Church  meet  this  spirit  with  a  kindred 
charity  ?  Could  she  not  let  men  accept  her  anti-Pelagian 
articles  in  a  Pelagian  sense  ?  Could  she  not  let  them  em- 
brace the  doctrine  of  an  unlimited  atonement  with  a 
limitation?  Could  she  not  permit  the  doctrine  of  the 
sacraments  to  be  understood  in  three  ways?  Why  must 
she  insist  on  clearing  herself  of  those  ingenious  interpre- 
tations of  her  faith,  which  enabled  men  to  confess  it 
without  holding  it?  Did  not  affection,  to  say  nothing 
of  her  own  ease  and  her  outward  glory,  did  not  love  seem 
to  plead  for  this?  And  against  all  this  was  set  over- 
honesty,  that  cold  repulsive  virtue.  The  kingdoms  of 
the  world  seemed  to  be  offered  her  as  the  price  of  silence, 
but  she  believed,  and,  as  of  old,  faith  was  too  mighty 
for  prudence.  I  believe,  therefore  I  have  spoken.  (May 
22,  1862.) 


96  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIIL 

Applying  this  principle  to  the  General  Synod,  Dr. 
Krauth  holds  that  by  its  very  name  it  is  bound  to  be  fully 
and  honestly  Lutheran,  no  matter  whether  the  doctrinal 
statements  of  its  original  constitution  were  distinctly 
Lutheran  or  unsatisfactory  on  the  point  of  confession; 
no  matter,  whether  the  founders  of  the  General  Synod 
personally  were  strong  and  sound,  or  weak  and  vascillat- 
ing,  in  their  Lutheran  consciousness. 

THE   GENERAL    SYNOD HER    NAME   AND    HER    FOUNDERS. 

The  two  points  connected  with  the  Constitution  of  the 
General  Synod  at  which  we  first  look  in  forming  our 
impressions  of  the  character  of  that  body,  are  the  two 
extremes,  locally  considered :  the  title  and  the  signatures 
— her  constitutional  name,  and  the  names  of  the  signers 
of  her  Constitution.  Her  name  in  the  title  is  "The 
General  Synod  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in 
the  United  States,"  and  in  Article  I,  "The  Evangelical 
Lutheran  General  Synod  of  the  United  States  of 
America."  With  honest  men,  the  assumption  of  a  name 
is  in  itself  a  pledge  of  the  most  solemn  kind  that  they  are, 
and  purpose  to  continue,  all  that  this  name  imports.  If 
there  be  for  any  reason  a  likelihood  that  the  meaning  of 
the  name  may  be  misunderstood,  they  carefully  guard 
against  the  possibility  of  mistake.  When  honest  men, 
therefore,  take  a  name  with  a  fixed  historical  sense, 
without  a  hint  that  they  depart  from  its  received  mean- 
ing, that  name  is  in  itself  an  ample  guarantee  of  their 
fidelity  to  the  thing  which  the  name  represents.  The 
founders  of  our  General  Synod  were  honest  men.  Any 
judgment  of  her  position,  therefore,  is  radically  wrong, 
which  ignores  the  full  moral  potency  of  her  name.  It  is 
not  to  be  denied,  in  terms  or  virtually,  that  the  very  name 
of  our  General  Synod  binds  her  to  be  an  Evangelical 
Lutheran  body.  We  insist  that  our  General  Synod,  in 
virtue  of  her  name,  apart  from  a  solitary  word  which 
further  defines  her  position,  is  morally  bound  to  be 
Evangelical  Lutheran.     And  by  this  we  mean  that 


i866.]  CALLED   LUTHERAN,   BE   LUTHERAN.  97 

our  General  Synod,  simply  because  of  her  name,  if  there 
were  no  other  reason  whatsoever,  must  be  Lutheran,  with 
all  the  pre-suppositions  which  mature  in  that  name;  that 
is,  she  may  not  be  a  Pagan  body,  but  must  accept  God's 
Word ;  may  not  be  a  Jewish  body,  but  must  be  a  Christian 
one ;  may  not  be  Romish,  but  must  be  Protestant ;  may  not 
be  Universalist,  Arian,  Socinian  or  Rationalistic,  but 
must  be  Evangelical ;  may  not  be  Anabaptist,  Fanatical, 
Zwinglian,  Calvinistic,  Episcopal,  Baptist  or  Arminian, 
but  must  be  Lutheran, — that  is,  must  be  that  thing  to 
which  alone  the  distinctive  name  Lutheran  has  ever  been 
historically  and  properly  applied. 

When  a  body  calls  itself  Lutheran,  it  binds  itself  to  be 
Lutheran,  whether  it  in  so  many  terms  accepts  the  faith 
of  the  Church  or  not;  for  the  historical  sense  of  the  name 
Lutheran  makes  it  embrace  those,  and  those  only,  who 
hold  and  confess  the  whole  faith  of  our  Church,  as  it  is 
summarily  stated  in  the  Augsburg  Confession.  A  moral 
obligation  is  not  annihilated  by  being  ignored,  and  an 
un-Lutheran  Synod,  although  it  may  be  silent  about  the 
Confession,  or  repudiate  it  in  set  terms,  is  still  bound  by 
its  Lutheran  name  to  be  Lutheran.  No  protest  can 
absolve  it  from  the  moral  duty  of  being  what  it  calls  itself, 
or  rid  it  of  the  moral  guilt  of  using  terms  deceitfully. 

It  is  a  radically  false  idea  that  the  General  Synod  might 
properly  be  called  Lutheran,  even  though  it  were  un- 
Lutheran,  because  the  private  opinions  of  individuals 
among  its  founders  or  its  early  friends  may  have  been 
un-Lutheran.  If  every  nominal  Lutheran  on  earth  were 
to  embrace  Romish,  Socinian,  Pelagian,  or  any  other  false 
views,  condemned  by  our  Church  when  she  received  her 
name,  that  apostacy  would  not  make  their  views  Lutheran, 
it  would  simply  prove  the  holders  of  them  to  be  un- 
Lutheran.  Such  views  might  kill  our  Church ;  they  could 
not  give  her  a  new  being.  History  will  allow  of  but  one 
Lutheran  Church.  If  she  be  a  true  Church,  she  is  im- 
mortal; and  if  she  be  not,  the  mystery  of  her  having  had 
one  life  is  not  to  be  deepened  by  giving  her  another.  Our 
Church  has  accepted  her  position,  and  on  it,  if  it  be  the 
7 


q8  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [CnAP.XllI. 

ridit  one,  she  must  stand,  or  by  its  side,  if  it  be  a  false 
one,  she  must  fall.  The  faith  of  a  church  is  its  heart. 
That  heart  pulsates  in  the  Confession,  and  when  the  pulsa- 
tion of  that  heart  ceases  forever,  the  church  is  gone,  it 
is  beyond  the  physician's  skill  to  set  a  new  heart  in  it. 
The  old  one  can  beat  no  more.  The  galvanic  stream  may 
counterfeit  in  the  yet  pliant  limbs  some  of  the  motions 
of  life  but  it  is  lost  time  to  employ  it.  Nothing  remains 
but  the  judgment  of  God,  and  of  posterity,  for  its  soul, 
and  a  speedy  burial  for  its  body.  It  is  too  late  to  make 
Lutheranism  over  again.  If  it  were  made  wrong,  we 
must  let  it  go,  and  find  something  to  take  its  place.  A 
church  can  have  but  one  life.  If  it  be  true,  she  needs  but 
one;  for  that  is  an  immortal  one.  If  she  be  false,  it  is 
appointed  unto  her  to  die ;  and  after  this,  no  second  life, 
but  the  abiding  judgment.  If  the  Lutheran  Church  be 
a  failure,  she  is  a  failure  forever. 

If  it  can  be  shown  that  any  man,  or  all  men,  who  took 
part   in    forming  a   General    Synod,   which  they   called 
Lutheran,  were  errorists,  that  does  not  change  the  moral 
force  of  the  name.     There  are  fifteen  names  appended 
to  the   Constitution  of   our   General   Synod,   as   it  was 
framed  in  1820.     Suppose  that  it  should  be  demonstrated 
that  one  of  those  signers  was  an  Arian, — what  does  that 
argue?     Nothing  more  than   this,   that   an   Arian   was 
guilty  of  the  great  inconsistency  of  taking  part  in  organiz- 
ing the  General  Synod  of  a  Church  which  rests  on  the 
everlasting  foundations  of  a  firm  faith  in  the  Trinity  in 
Unity— a  Church  which  has  sung  through  the  generations 
past,  and  will  sing  through  the  generations  yet  to  be,  and 
will  sing  forever,  "Blessed  be  the  holy  Three,  the  undi- 
vided One."     Suppose  it  shall  be  shown  that  another  was 
a  Socinian,  another  a  Pelagian,  another  a  high  Calvinist, 
another  a  low  Arminian,  another  Popish,  another  Ration- 
alistic, that  one  was  an  indolent  Latitudinarian,  who  cared 
nothing  about  the  points  on  which  men  are  divided,  and 
that  another  was  too  ignorant  to  know,  or  too  obtuse  to 
comprehend  the  most  obvious  and  necessary  metes  and 
definitions  by  which  truth  is  segregated  from  error, — 


i866.]  BIGOTS    AND    LIBERALS.  99 

what  then  ?  Is  the  inference  to  be  drawn  that  our  General 
Synod  admits  all  the  tendencies  which  germinate  in  these 
errors,  and  bud  and  blow  in  these  errorists,  to  be  normal, 
ha\ing  equal  constitutional  rights,  to  be  forever  respected, 
and  forever  left  unrepressed?  If  we  are  to  reach  a  canon 
in  this  way,  then  we  must  know  what  every  man  of  the 
fifteen  held,  lest  we  should  do  injustice  to  his  private 
notion,  by  not  giving  it  full  latitude  with  the  others. 
And  how  shall  we  treat  the  strict  Lutheranism  of  some 
of  these  founders,  if  we  find  that  any  of  them  were 
tainted  with  such  a  thing — that  Lutheranism,  which 
knows  of  but  one  true  faith,  and  refuses  to  fraternize 
except  with  it?  "Oh,  easily  enough!"  it  may  be 
answered;  "tolerate  it,  too,  in  common  with  other  errors, 
provided  it  is  willing  to  put  itself  on  a  level  with  them, 
and  assume  no  airs.  But  if  it  claim  any  thing  more — if 
it  assume  that  it  has  any  more  right  in  the  Lutheran 
Church  on  this  side  the  water,  than  any  other  opinion,  it 
shall  be  hunted  to  the  death."  All  was  peace  in  the 
Pantheon,  though  the  gods  were  innumerable,  while  their 
friends  consented  to  bring  them  in,  in  the  crowd.  The 
offense  of  Christianity  was,  that  it  claimed  that  its  Deity 
was  supreme, — that  to  accept  Him  was  to  reject  all  others. 
It  was  to  repress  this  abominable  Christian  exclusiveness 
that  the  narrow  bigots  who  held  it  were  scourged,  tor- 
tured, beheaded,  and  burned,  by  the  liberal  Pagans  of  the 
day.  "If  you  had  been  satisfied,"  said  these  philosophic 
men,  "with  your  just  share, — if  you  had  only  claimed 
what  we  claim  for  our  gods,  you  could  have  a  niche  for 
your  favorite.  You  could  have  put  your  Christos  with 
Mercury  and  Venus,  and  could  have  worshipped  him  to 
your  heart's  content.  But  as  for  such  narrow  bigotry  as 
yours,  your  one  God,  to  exclude  all  the  other  gods ;  your 
one  Lord,  to  put  down  all  the  other  lords ;  your  one  faith, 
to  put  down  all  the  choice  opinions  of  great  men,  we  will 
have  none  of  it;  nothing  but  hacking,  hewing,  torturing, 
will  answer.  We  will  try,  render,  fry,  boil  and  broil 
your  abominable  intolerance  out  of  you.  Down  with  all 
bigotry    and    Christianity!     Up    with    a    liberal-minded 


lOO  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Cuat.XUI. 

Paganism!  The  truth  is,  that  if  inflexible  adherence  to 
the  one  faith,  as  alone  to  be  allowed,  be  bigotry,  the 
Christians  were  bigots,  and  the  men  who  put  them  to 
death  were  liberals. 

Christianity  in  its  own  nature,  as  divine,  is  of  necessity 
proscriptive — it  can  allow  the  right  of  nothing  but  itself 
in  the  hearts  of  men.  Mere  human  figments  and  notions 
may  consistently  and  safely  tolerate  each  other,  but  Truth 
must  proscribe  or  be  proscribed.  The  Lutheran  Church 
in  this  country  will  yet  see  that  liberty  for  any  other 
system  within  her  communion,  means  proscription  of 
Lutheranism  itself, — that  if  she  allow  any  other  faith 
than  her  own  to  find  shelter  within  her,  she  will  soon 
cease  to  allow  her  own — and  that  the  most  merciless 
denouncers  of  true  Lutheranism,  and  of  sincere 
Lutherans,  will  be  those  who  wear  the  name  of  Lutherans. 
Even  now  the  extremest  misrepresentations  of  Lutheran- 
ism are  sometimes  heard  from  nominal  Lutherans,  and 
some  of  those  who  call  themselves  brethren  in  the  faith, 
are  the  last  to  whom  we  should  make  an  appeal  for  the 
simplest  justice.  Men  that  have  called  themselves 
Lutherans  have  characterized  their  Church  and  its  doc- 
trines, in  such  terms,  as  the  bitterest  passions  of  contro- 
versy in  the  sixteenth  century  hardly  called  forth.  Jesuit 
malignity  itself  has  never  prompted  such  terms  of 
reproach  as  some  who  pretend  to  be  of  our  Church  have 
applied  to  her  doctrines,  and  if  you  analyze  the  strongest 
prejudices  of  some  nominal  Lutherans,  you  will  find  that 
they  have  been  artfully  inflamed  and  directed  against 
Lutheranism  itself.  We  claim,  that  within  any  church, 
or  any  Synod  which  calls  itself  Lutheran,  Lutheranism 
shall  not  be  one  power  of  many,  but  the  supreme  power — 
that  it  shall  not  be  tolerated,  but  shall  rule — and  over 
against  this  primary  maxim  of  morals  and  of  self-pre- 
servation, it  matters  very  little  what  may  be,  or  may  be 
pretended  to  be,  the  private  notions  of  some  of  the  men, 
or  of  all  the  men  of  a  certain  era. 

But  were  it  not  so — were  it  of  far  more  importance 
than  it  is  to  go  back  of  official  documents,  to  the  purely 


i866.]  HEARSAY    OR    WRITTEN   EVIDENCE.  loi 

private  notions  of  those  who  wrote  or  subscribed  them, — 
to  ascertain  satisfactorily  the  private  views  of  men  half 
a  century  ago,  is  near^  an  impossibility.  It  is  a  hard 
thing  for  a  man  accurately  to  know  what  his  own  views 
were  in  time  so  long  gone.  A  man  may  insist  to-day 
that  his  views  were  thus  and  so  at  a  certain  period,  when 
his  writings  of  that  period  are  flagrantly  contradictory  of 
his  present  impressions.  He  is  apt  to  think  now  that  he 
did  mean  what  he  now  wishes  he  had  meant.  Oral  tradi- 
tion is  a  most  un-Protestant  species  of  evidence.  The 
mouth  is  a  Papist,  the  pen  is  a  Protestant.  "He  said,"  is 
Romish;  "It  is  written,"  is  Lutheran.  One  grand  object 
of  written  documents  is  to  avoid  the  confusion,  conflict 
and  inevitable  error,  which  arise  from  the  effort  to  guide 
ourselves  by  impressions  of  what  this  or  that  man  thought, 
or  said.  To  leave  a  written  statement,  made  in  intelligible 
words,  to  get  at  somebody's  impression  of  what  he  thinks 
he  thought  long  ago,  or  of  what  he  thought  somebody 
meant,  is  for  a  man  to  carry  his  candle  away  from  the 
blazing  fagots  of  his  fireside,  to  plunge  into  a  morass  in 
the  hope  of  lighting  it  at  a  will-o'-the-wisp.  As  members 
of  the  General  Synod,  we  know  its  founders  only  in  their 
document,  its  Constitution.  They  wrote  that  document 
for  the  express  purpose  of  conveying  their  meaning  to 
posterity.  It  is  the  result  of  their  collective  wisdom,  and 
if  we  cannot  learn  from  it  what  they  mean,  we  are  not 
likely  to  learn  anywhere  else.  If  any  man  assert  that 
they  meant  some  certain  thing,  he  must  show  us  that 
they  meant  it  in  the  Constitution,  not  out  of  it.  Eaves- 
droppers and  the  chroniclers  of  table-talk  are  insecure 
witnesses.     Men  do  not  make  words,  but  take  them. 

However  venerable  and  honored  men  may  be,  they 
cannot  destroy  first  principles.  A  unanimous  resolution 
that  "whatever  is,  is  not,"  won't  make  it  so.  But  even 
that  which,  in  its  own  nature  is  capable  of  change,  cannot 
be  changed  by  every  one  who  is  willing  to  change  it. 
The  doctrines  of  the  Lutheran  Church  cannot  be  changed. 
She  may  add  a  fuller  expression  of  them,  but  she  cannot 
change  them.     But  if  her  doctrines  could  be  changed,  it 


I02  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [CuAv.XlU. 

could  only  be  by  a  power  as  general  as  that  which  estab- 
lished them,  and  they  must  be  set  aside  as  solemnly  and 
officially  as  they  were  accepted.  It  requires  the  official 
act  of  a  majority  in  the  Lutheran  Church  to  make  a  thing 
Lutheran,  and  any  man  who  claims  for  himself  or  his 
work  that  name,  separate  from,  or  in  conflict  with,  such 
a  general  act,  makes  a  claim  which  must  be  false,  and 
may  be  fraudulent.  The  Synod  or  man  that  does  so,  is 
usurping  for  tyrannous  abuse  what  belongs  alone  to  the 
freedom  of  the  Church  as  a  whole. 

But  suppose  it  could  be  demonstrated  that  our  General 
Synod  was  not  meant  by  its  founders  to  be  Lutheran,  and 
suppose  that  this  fact  constituted  a  warrant  for  continu- 
ing it  as  an  un-Lutheran  body,  what  result  have  we 
reached?  This,  beyond  all  question,  that  its  name 
should  be  changed  so  as  to  represent  the  actual  thing 
named ;  in  a  word,  that,  not  being  Lutheran,  it  should  not 
be  called  Lutheran.  But  while  the  name  stands,  and 
while  we  are  all  agreed  that  it  ought  to  stand,  the  infer- 
ence is  resistless,  that  our  General  Synod  is,  and  of  right 
ought  to  be  an  Evangelical  Lutheran  body,  and  the 
assumption  that  it  is  such  should  condition  an  interpreta- 
tion of  every  word  which  is  found  in  her  Constitution, 
With  the  genuine  attitude  of  our  General  Synod,  as 
defined  by  terms  accepted  in  their  obvious  grammatico- 
historical  meaning,  we  are  satisfied ;  but  we  do  not  hesitate 
to  say  that  the  mode  of  interpretation  which  is  used  by 
some  violent  partisans  in  ascertaining  her  doctrinal  posi- 
tion, if  it  were  well  grounded,  would  not  only  exclude 
her  from  any  just  right  to  be  called  Lutheran,  but  would 
properly  excite  the  suspicion  of  all  Evangelical  Pro- 
testants of  every  name.  But  she  ought  to  vindicate 
herself  from  all  irnputation  of  complicity  with  any  mis- 
representation of  her  true  position.  If  her  Constitutional 
test  of  doctrine,  as  amended,  is  capable  of  two  meanings, 
she  should  say  which  is  the  true  one.  She  owes  it  to 
the  cause  of  truth,  to  common  honesty,  to  the  real  unity 
and  peace  of  the  Church  she  represents,  to  say  where  she 
stands  in  regard  to  the  doctrines  of  God's  Word,  which 


1862-66.]  ARE    YOU   A   LUTHERAN?  IO3 

have  been,  and  are  most  frequently  obscured,  or  mis- 
represented. In  a  world  of  error  our  Church  is  bound 
to  show  that  she  stands  by  the  truth,  is  bound  to  prove 
herself  a  living-  witness  of  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints.  If  it  be  the  duty  of  the  individual  Christian  to 
occupy  no  neutral  position  in  regard  to  any  error,  yet 
more  is  the  largest  and  most  important  ecclesiastical  body 
in  the  Church  under  obligation  to  plant  itself  clearly  on 
the  truth,  so  that  no  man  may  mistake  her  position — so 
that  her  whole  moral  weight  shall  go  with  the  truth  and 
the  right.      (April  4,  1866.) 

Applying  the  tests  adopted  by  the  General  Synod  itself 
he  addresses  himself  in  this  forcible  language  to  the  con- 
science of  his  opponents : 

Do  you  believe  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  God's 
Word  to  be  taught  in  a  manner  substantially  correct  in 
the  doctrinal  articles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession?  Do 
you  believe  that  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  the  Cate- 
chisms of  Luther  are  a  summary  and  just  exhibition  of 
the  fundamental  principles  of  God's  Word?  This  is  as 
mild  a  test  as  could  well  be  presented  of  a  man's  Luth- 
eranism.  Will  yours  bear  it?  Do  you  believe  that  the 
fundamental  doctrines  of  God's  Word  are  taught  in  the 
Confessions,  or  have  you  doctrines  which  you  are  dis- 
posed to  make  fundamental,  about  which  they  are  silent? 
If  you  have,  you  are  not  a  Lutheran  on  our  General 
Synod's  definition.  Do  you  believe  that  those  funda- 
mental doctrines  are  taught  in  a  manner  substantially 
correct,  or  do  you  think  the  manner  is  incorrect,  even  in 
substantial,  poor,  confused,  capable  of  twenty  different 
meanings,  each  one  of  which  has  as  good  a  claim  as  any 
other  to  recognition,  and  that  there  are  arts  and 
mysteries  of  interpretation  by  which  our  Confessions  are 
Romish  and  Protestant.  Orthodox  and  Socinian,  Pauline 
and  Pelagian,  Zwinglian  and  Lutheran?  If  the  latter 
is  your  view,  you  are  not  a  Lutheran  as  our  General 
Synod  defines  the  term.     When  it  makes  our  Confessions. 


I04      CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [C^w.Xlll. 

a  test  of  doctrine,  it  implies  that  their  meaning  is  ascer- 
tainable, and  that  they  have  but  one  meaning.  Are  you 
hugging  yourself  in  the  delusion  that  you  are  a  Lutheran, 
because  you  can  receive,  on  what  you  acknowledge  to  be 
fundamental,  the  words  of  the  Confessions  in  some 
sense,  though  it  is  demonstrable,  and  you  know  it,  that 
this  sense  is  not  theirs,  but  yours? 

We  are  not  going  to  sit  in  judgment  on  you.  It  is  not 
to  us  you  stand  or  fall.  If  your  conscience  acquit  you, 
we  shall  not  condemn  you.  Neither  God  nor  man  has 
set  us  as  a  ruler  or  a  divider  over  you.  We  only  put 
fraternal  queries;  we  make  no  pretension  to  fulminate 
judicial  decisions. 

But  for  those  who  call  themselves  Lutherans,  to  revile 
their  Church,  to  abate  all  they  can  of  the  glories  they 
cannot  deny,  to  contrast  it  unfavorably  with  the  extremest 
products  of  the  mushroom  compost  of  pseudo-Protestant 
sectarianism,  to  heap  on  its  head  the  crimes  of  those  who 
have  been  its  betrayers,  to  strain  statistics,  to  pervert 
facts,  and  obtrude  guesses  as  truth  simply  to  dishonor  it, 
— for  such  persons  the  assumption  of  the  title  is  a  mon- 
strous fraud.  To  bear  the  hallowed  name  of  our  Church, 
our  dear  and  venerable  Church  (venerable  and  dear  in 
spite  of  all  the  foul  aspersions  of  ignorance  and  of  men- 
dacity), to  bear  that  name  only  to  labor  to  rend  the 
Church  into  fragments,  to  make  her  a  hissing  to  her  own 
children  and  to  the  world,  is  a  treachery  which  it  is  hard 
to  characterize  with  sufficient  severity.  (March  2^, 
1862.) 

AMERICAN  LUTHERAN  CHURCH 

VS. 

EVANGELICAL  LUTHERAN  CHURCH  IN  AMERICA. 

In  the  course  of  the  controversy  Dr.  Krauth  naturally 
was  led  to  examine  that  principal  question:  Is  there 
such  a  thing  as  an  American  Lutheran  Church,  in  dis- 
tinction from  the  historic  Lutheran  Church  of  the  Augs- 


1861-67.]     CLAIMS  OF  AMERICAN  LUTHERANS.  105 

burg  Confession?  and  if  so,  on  what  does  it  rest  its 
claims,  and  where  does  it  set  forth  its  faith?  In  speak- 
ing of  the  Church  planted  in  this  Western  world  by  the 
Lutherans  from  the  Fatherland,  one  of  the  champions  of 
American  Lutheranism  said :  "  We  are  their  offspring 
or  have  entered  on  their  inheritance,  and  although  we 
may  claim  the  right  to  mould  according  to  our  new 
position,  or  to  alter  or  amend  what  in  our  judgment 
needs  it,  we  resign  neither  the  name  nor  the  right  to  the 
inheritance."  Of  course,  if  the  things  to  be  altered  or 
amended  were  matters  of  Christian  liberty,  the  proposi- 
tion would  not  be  objectionable.  But  it  was  in  matters 
of  faith  and  doctrine  that  the  liberty  was  claimed  to 
alter  or  amend  according  to  "  our  judgment,"  however 
remote  the  result  might  be  from  the  original  and  con- 
fessed faith  of  the  Church.  And  yet,  at  the  same  time, 
the  name  Lutheran  and  the  whole  "  heritage  "  of  the 
Lutheran  Church  was  claimed  as  their  rightful  property 
by  the  very  men  who  thus  lightly  cast  off  or  reconstructed 
the  faith  of  the  Church. 

From  a  series  of  articles  in  which  Dr.  Krauth  very 
thoroughly  examined  the  whole  question,  we  give  the  fol- 
lowing quotations : 

In  the  only  sense  in  which  the  term  "  American  Luth- 
eran Church  "  can  be  honestly  used,  we  claim  to  be  a 
member  of  that  Church.  By  this,  we  mean  that  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  has  an  existence  in 
America,  and  that  it  is  our  privilege  on  that  soil  to  be  in 
her  Communion.  We  are  Lutherans,  because  in  accord- 
ance with  the  solemn  declaration  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
inade  centuries  ago,  and  never  retracted,  as  to  what  is 
essential  unity,  union  and  communion,  we  accept  her 
only  rule  of  faith,  which  is  God's  Word,  and  heartily 
believe,  teach  and  confess  that  her  faith  is  in  accordance 
with  that  rule;  and  we  are  American  Lutherans  because 
■we  belong  to  that  part  of  our  Church  which  is  in  America. 


I06  CHARLES  PORTERFJELD  KRAUTH.  [Chat.  XUl. 

We  do  not  concede  that  any  man  is  more  American  than 
we,  because  he  is  less  Lutheran ;  nor  that  any  principles 
cease  to  be  Lutheran,  because  they  are  on  this  side  of  the 
Atlantic.  Usages  originating  in  her  liberty,  our  Church, 
in  every  land  may  change  and  adapt  to  her  peculiar  cir- 
cumstances and  wants,  but  truth  is  eternal  and  unchange- 
able. With  her  own  witness  as  to  what  is  truth,  the 
Church  stands  or  falls.  The  witness  of  our  Church  to- 
her  faith  is  given  in  the  Augsburg  Confession;  if  she  has 
witnessed  to  falsehood  and  error,  her  name  and  her  life 

must  be  the  penalty  of  her  error 

Is  there  such  a  thing  as  an  American  Lutheran  Church, 
distinct  from  what  is  known  in  history  as  the  Evange- 
lical Lutheran  Church?  We  reply,  there  is  not.  There 
may  be  individual  and  synodical  apostacy  to  any  extent 
from  the  faith  of  the  Church,  but  this  does  not  in  itself 
make  a  new  Church,  any  more  than  boils,  smallpox,  or  the 
loss  of  an  eye  or  a  nose  make  a  new  body.  The  cor- 
ruption of  the  old  is  not  a  formation  of  the  new.  There- 
is  no  such  thing  as  an  "  American  Lutheran  Church  "  in 
any  other  true  and  honest  sense  than  this — that  there  is. 
an  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  America,  which,  in 
the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  and  in  the  right  administration- 
of  the  Sacraments,  is  one  with  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church  everywhere  else.  There  is  but  one  Lutheran 
Church  in  the  world;  and,  if  we  do  not  belong  to  it,  we 
do  not  belong  to  the  Lutheran  Church  at  all.  To  illus- 
trate the  propositions  we  have  laid  down,  we  offer  the 
following  facts : 

1.  There  is  no  Church  in  this  country  which  bears  the 
name  American  Lutheran.  The  General  Synod  calls 
itself  the  General  Synod  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church — and  so  the  District  Synods,  Societies  in  the 
Church,  Conferences  and  Congregations,  all  bear  tlie  old 
historical  name.  We  have  yet  to  know  of  an  Ecclesias- 
tical Association,  large  or  small,  which  has  taken  to  itself 
the  title  American  as  descriptive  of  anything  in  the  char- 
acter of  its  Lutheranism. 

2.  No  man  can  point  to  any  book,  pamphlet,  or  paper 


1861-67.]  THE  BIBLE  THE  RULE  OF  FAITH.  107 

in  which  the  '*  American  Lutheran  Cliurch  "  gives  any 
authorised  account  of  itself. 

3.  Lutherans,  certainly  no  less  Lutheran  and  no  less 
American  in  birth,  affection  and  principle  than  any  men 
who  claim  to  belong  to  this  mysterious  "  American 
Lutheran  "  Church,  repudiate  the  whole  idea  as  an  im- 
position on  common  honesty  and  common  sense.  If 
there  be  an  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  America, 
that  is  enough  for  them.  As  to  an  "  American  Lutheran 
Church."  as  something  distinct  from  the  Church  of  the 
Reformation  in  doctrine,  they  see  no  need  for  it,  and  no 
possibility  of  its  being. 

4.  The  men  who  talk  of  the  American  Lutheran 
Church  avow  themselves  as  on  the  old  foundation  as 
regards  the  rule  of  faith.  They  believe,  they  say,  that 
the  Word  of  God  is  the  only  rule  of  faith.  So  far  as 
they  really  are  true  to  this  foundation,  there  is  nothing 
American  in  their  Lutheranism;  for  this  is  the  founda- 
tion of  Evangelical  Lutheranism.  and  the  avowal  of  it  is 
common  to  all  Protestantism.  The  simple  acceptance 
of  this  statement  of  the  foundation  no  more  makes  them 
Lutherans  than  it  makes  them  Episcopalians,  Presby- 
terians, Baptists,  Methodists,  or  Campbellites,  or 
Socinians,  Pelagians  and  Universalists,  who  make  the 
same  statement.  All  these  receive  nominally  the  Bible 
as  the  only  rule  of  faith. 

5.  But  when  "  American  Lutherans  "  come  to  interpret 
this  rule  of  faith,  they  do  it  upon  different  principles  from 
those  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church.  In  various 
degrees  they  use  the  natural  and  unsanctified  reason  as  a 
thing  which  is  to  shed  light  upon  God's  Word,  not  as 
something  to  be  enlightened  by  it.  In  genuine  Lutheran 
principles  of  interpretation,  reason  is  simply  a  witness  on 
the  facts ;  in  American  Lutheranism  it  is  a  judge  upon 
the  law.  In  genuine  Lutheranism  the  natural  faculties, 
aided,  in  answer  to  prayer,  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  His 
personal  influence  through  the  Word,  see  what,  by  the 
laws  of  human  language,  is  meant  by  the  divine  words, 
and  allow  the  absolute  authority  of  Holy  Scripture.     It 


I08  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.[Ck\p.XIIL 

maintains  that  no  difficulties  on  the  part  of  natural  reason 
justify  us  in  setting  aside  the  simple  force  of  divine 
words.  Thomas  says,  for  example,  to  Christ,  "  My 
Lord,  and  my  God !"  Now,  nothing  is  more  certain,  by 
the  laws  of  natural  reason,  than  that  a  man  recently 
crucified,  dead  and  buried,  with  the  wounds  of  his 
crucifixion  still  open,  is  not  Lord  and  God.  Rationalism, 
therefore,  making  reason  the  judge  of  the  words,  declares 
that  they  are  only  an  exclamation  of  surprise.  Luth- 
eranism,  only  allowing  reason  to  be  the  witness  of  the 
obvious  force  of  the  words,  accepts  them  literally;  and 
believes  that  the  crucified  one  was  truly  Lord  and  truly 
God.  That  most  "  American  Lutherans  "  accept  the 
doctrine  of  our  Lord's  proper  divinity  is  due,  not  to  their 
principles  of  interpretation,  but  to  their  inconsistency. 
At  the  same  time,  it  is  well-known  that  under  this  same 
plea  which  American  Lutherans  make,  there  have  been 
Socinians  and  Arians  harbored  in  our  Church  in  this 
country;  and  the  doctrine  of  the  eternal  Sonship  of 
Christ,  which  is  an  essential  part  of  the  Church's  state- 
ment of  her  faith  in  the  Trinity,  has  been  passed  over  in 
silence  by  some  of  the  living  leaders  of  this  School,  and 
denied  in  downright  terms  by  others. 

It  is  a  law  of  language  that  metaphor  lies  in  the  noun. 
We  say,  "  God  is  a  rock,"  and  we  know  that  it  is  not 
meant  that  he  is  physically  a  rock,  because  the  noun 
"rock"  is  used  metaphorically — for  a  defense  or  refuge. 
When  we  say,  "  God  is  a  spirit,"  we  know  that  he  is 
literally  a  spirit,  because  that  word  is  not  metaphorical, 
and  the  "  is  "  is  unchanging  in  meaning.  When  at  a 
table  we  say,"  Take,  eat,  this  is  bread  made  of  wheat," 
we  know  the  expression  is  literal,  because  the  noun 
"bread"  is  not  metaphorical.  When  Christ  says,  "Take, 
eat,  this  is  my  body,"  the  word  body  cannot  be  metaphor- 
ical, because  it  was  Christ's  literal  body  which  "was  given 
and  broken  for  His  people."  When  in  defiance  of  the 
law  of  language  "  American  Lutheranism "  pretends 
that  "  is  "  can  mean  "  is  like,"  it  simply  kills  the  whole 
Word  of  God,   for  wherever  it  says   from  Genesis  to 


1861-6;.]     LUTHERANS    WITH   XO    CONFESSION.  109 

Revelation  "  is,"  this  theory  enables  men  to  transmute 
it  into  "resembles."'  God  resembles  a  Spirit,  Jesus  re- 
sembles God,  the  Holy  Spirit  resembles  a  Comforter. 

6.  As  "  American  Lutherans  "  have  a  different  prin- 
ciple of  interpretation  from  that  of  the  Church,  they  reach 
different  conclusions  from  those  of  the  Church.  As 
human  reason,  out  of  its  proper  sphere,  has  nothing  to 
guide  it,  "  American  Lutherans "  come  to  conflicting 
conclusions  on  many  points,  and  have  no  centre  of  unity 
whatever,  except  that  they  agree  in  rejecting  in  greater 
or  smaller  measure,  the  doctrines  of  the  Lutheran  Church. 
There  is  no  system  of  Theology  which  they  unite  in  ap- 
proving. 

They  are  in  conflict,  not,  like  the  Lutherans  of  Mis- 
souri and  Buffalo,  on  one  or  two  points  (which,  thanks 
be  to  God,  seem  about  to  be  settled),  but  on  every  point. 
There  is  not  a  statement  of  doctrine  on  a  single  point  on 
which  they  can  perfectly  agree.  Among  them  have  been 
strong  Calvinists,  although  the  predominant  tendency  is 
to  a  very  low  Arminianism,  and  to  Pelagianism.  They 
have  no  Confession  of  Faith.  That  most  indefinite 
thing,  on  which  nobody  could  sit  or  stand,  which  was 
called  the  Definite  Platform,  was  repudiated  by  the  larger 
part  of  American  Lutherans,  and  those  who  profess  to 
accept  it  cannot  tell  us  what  it  means,  nor  even  what 
they  meant  it  to  be. 

7.  When  we  ask  after  the  history  of  this  pretended  new 
Church,  we  find  that  it  wishes  to  claim  identity  historic- 
ally with  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church.  It  talks  of 
Luther  as  if  he  belonged  to  it,  although  the  bitterest 
protests  of  his  life,  not  short  of  those  he  made  against 
Rome  itself,  were  directed  against  the  very  errors  which 
they  pretend  are  not  only  Lutheranism,  but  the  only 
pure  Lutheranism.  Their  position  virtually  is,  that 
Zwingle  was  the  real  Lutheran,  and  Luther  the  pretender, 
or  Papist  in  disguise.  They  would  claim  Melanchthon, 
who  wrote  the  Augsburg  Confession,  in  which  it  is  said 
that  the  unity  of  the  Church  consists  in  assent  in  the 
doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  which  doctrines  are  contained  in 


I  lo  CHARLES  PORT  ERF  I  ELD  KRAUT  H.  [Chap.  XIII. 

those  very  articles  of  faith,  the  "  Articuli  Fidei  Praecipui," 
the  principal  or  fundamental  articles  of  faith  to  which 
the  doctrinal  part  of  the  Confession  is  devoted.     They 
claim  the  very  men  whom,  in  stigmatizing  living  believers 
as  wretched  symbolists,  they  also  stigmatize.       Luther 
and   Chemnitz,    Spener  and   Franke,    Schwartz,   Egede, 
Harms,  the  Patriarch  Muehlenberg,  among  the  great  de- 
parted,   and    men    like    Delitzsch,    Henry    Kurtz,    and 
Hengstenberg,  not  to  speak  of  men  on  our  own  soil, 
among  the  living  noble  men,  not  unworthy  of  their  place 
in  the  great  army  of  Confessors,  these  all  because  of 
their  fidelity  to  the  pure  faith  of  our  Church,  are  really 
stigmatized  as  "  wretched  symbolists  "  with  "  wretched 
theories."    Yet  it  is  out  of  the  history  of  the  very  Church 
which  these  great  men  loved  and  still  love,  that  "  Ameri- 
can Lutheranism  "  strives  to  gather  a  few  fig-leaves  to 
hide  its  nakedness,  when  the  judging  voice  summons  it  to 
account.     From  the   names   and   mighty   deeds   of   our 
fathers,  the  glory  of  which  illumines  a  world  which  was 
not  worthy  of  them,  this  poor  and  dishonest  thing  which 
tries  to  cover  with  their  authority  what  they  abhorred, 
draws  the  largest  part  of  its  claim  on  the  respect  of  man- 
kind.    It  is  willing  to  use  the  names  of  these  heroes  of 
the  faith  as  a  part  of  its  clap-trap — but  for  their  prin- 
ciples, their  doctrines,  their  uncompromising  truthfulness 
of  speech,  and  their  unshakable  honesty  of  life,  it  has  no 
taste  whatever.     It  will  accept  all  the  property  of  the  past, 
but  will  assume  none  of  its  debts. 

8.  As  regards  the  devotional  and  practical  life  of 
Christianity,  this  tendency  has  developed  nothing.  Take 
from  it  what  lingers  in  it  as  a  legacy  of  the  pure,  good 
system  with  which  it  battles,  and  remove  what  is  merely 
imitative  of  surrounding  sects,  and,  in  its  own  nature, 
transient,  and  nothing  is  left.  There  is  nothing  really 
good  in  it  which  was  not  developed  by  the  living  faith  of 
our  Church  long  before  "  American  Lutheranism  "  had 
a  being.  If  some  of  the  practical  activity  of  our  Church 
is  found  among  men  of  this  School,  it  is  no  less  true  that 
a   larger,   more   earnest   and   abiding  energy   is   found 


1861-67.]       NO  NAME,  NO  CREED.  NO  HISTORY.  m 

among  those  most  devoted  to  the  pure  doctrines  of  our 
Church.  Is  practical  activity  found  among  some  who 
depart  from  the  faith?  So  is  there,  on  the  other  hand, 
among  many  of  the  very  same  class,  as  complete  an  inert- 
ness and  deadness  as  is  possible.  The  life  and  hope  of 
our  Church  in  tliis  country,  are  with  the  men  who  are 
firm  in  the  faith  of  the  Church,  and  with  those  who  are 
most  near  them  in  spirit — the  men  whose  difficulties  in 
regard  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  are  educational, 
and  whose  deepest  sympathies  and  most  earnest  hopes 
are  with  her  genuine  faith  and  her  true  life.  Apart  from 
these  classes,  the  ''  American  Lutheran  Church  "  has  its 
true  symbol  in  the  weathercock  and  the  soap  bubble.  The 
men  who  are  spending  their  energies  in  misrepresenting 
the  doctrines  of  our  Church,  and,  in  the  effort  to  rend  it 
so  as  to  form  a  new  sect,  are  either  tools  or  the  users  of 
tools.  They  talk  of  vital  piety  and  experimental  reli- 
gion, but  they  do  not  illustrate  them. 

The  "  American  Lutheran  Church  "  lacks  three  ele- 
ments to  justify  its  name.  i.  It  is  not  Ainerican — this 
is  its  first  lack.  Its  fundamental  principles  were  asserted 
by  ancient  errorists,  renewed  in  part  by  Zwingle,  in  other 
parts  by  the  Anabaptist  fanatics,  and  carried  out  by  the 
Socinians  and  Rationalists.  These  principles  are  simply 
an  adoption  and  adaptation  of  European  error,  and  are 
not  American.  2.  This  so-called  Church  is  not  Lutheran 
— this  is  its  second  lack.  Its  whole  distinctive  life  turns 
upon  the  denial  of  the  Lutheran  faith.  3.  It  is  not  a 
Church — this  is  its  third  lack.  It  has  no  separate  organ- 
ization, no  name,  no  creed,  and  no  history.  Not  Ameri' 
can,  not  Lutheran,  and  not  a  Church,  where  and  what  is 
the  "  American  Lutheran  Church  ?" 

Will  brethren  within  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church, 
who  insist  that  they  have  a  right  to  establish  an 
"American  Lutheranism"  with  a  distinctive  position  in 
conflict  with  the  fundamental  conception  of  our  Church, 
will  they  reflect  for  a  moment  what  it  is  they  propose  to 
establish?     "American  Lutheranism"  really  means  that 


112  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIIL 

they  are  to  have  a  new  faith,  a  mutilated  confession,  a 
life  which  abruptly  breaks  with  all  our  history,  a  spirit 
alien  to  that  of  the  genuine  Lutheranism  of  the  past.  An 
American  Lutheran  Church,  such  as  they  dream  of,  would 
have  no  claim  as  a  part  of  its  heritage  to  the  immortal 
names,  and  holy  memories  of  the  past.  It  would  be  a 
new  sect  in  this  land  of  sects.  God  save  us  from  any 
more  sects :  but  if  we  must  have  them,  let  no  one  of  them 
bear  the  sacred  name  of  our  Church. 

It  is  too  late  in  the  day  to  invent  some  novelty  which 
shall  pass  current  under  the  title  of  Lutheranism,  how- 
ever that  title  may  be  qualified  by  any  other.  Lutheran- 
ism is  neither  a  dubious  speculation  nor  a  passing  experi- 
ment, but  a  long  established  life.  It  is  a  genuine  Chris- 
tianity, and  at  its  heart  all  the  purest  religion  of  the 
Protestant  world  caught  the  first  life-pulse  of  its  own. 

Three  centuries  of  assault  have  not  shaken  the  faith  of 
our  Church — three  centuries  more  will  not  do  it.  How- 
ever specious  the  new  form  of  apostacy  which  you  call 
American  Lutheranism  may  seem  to  you,  it  will  be  like  all 
the  other  errors,  which,  outside  or  inside  of  our  Church 
have  been  directed  against  her  faith.  It  will  utterly  fail. 
What  Lutheranism  meant  three  hundred  years  before  we 
were  born,  it  will  mean  three  hundred  years  after  we  are 
buried.  "  American  Lutheranism  "  carries  its  death  in 
its  name.  The  name  it  tries  to  float  on,  is  really  a  mill- 
stone about  its  neck,  and  will  sink  it  to  the  bottom. 

FUNDAMENTAL  DOCTRINES. 

It  is  of  great  interest  to  notice  in  Dr.  Krauth's  writ- 
ings during  those  years  of  controversy,  a  steady  growth 
in  his  own  convictions  toward  the  full  and  unreserved 
recognition  of  the  Confession  of  the  Church,  as  binding 
in  all  its  doctrinal  statements,  for  all  her  teachers  and 
members.  In  his  articles  on  the  General  Synod  of  the 
year  1857  (See  Vol.  I.,  pp.  381  ff.)  he  had  still  main- 
tained that  "  the  doctrinal  basis  of  the  General  Synod 
was  designed    to  be  one  on  which,  without  sacrifice  of 


1861-6-.]  WHAT    IS    FUNDAMENTAL?  I13 

conscience,  brethren  differing  in  non-fundamentals  might 
meet,"  yea.  that  the  question  "  whether  non-fundamental 
doctrines  were  taught  in  the  Confession  was  left  entirely 
untouched  in  that  basis."  While,  for  his  own  person, 
he  held  fast  to  the  Confession, even  on  the  disputed  points, 
his  drift  was,  nevertheless,  only  about  this,  that  the 
cutting  away  of  certain  parts  of  the  Confession,  was  not, 
indeed,  to  be  made  in  form,  as  the  Definite  Platform  of 

1856  had  done,  but  that  nevertheless  every  man  should 
be  allowed  mentally  to  do  it,  if  he  saw  fit.  But  the  spirit 
revealed  by  the  American  Lutheran  party  in  the  course 
of  the  controversy,  gradually  convinced  him  that  the 
position    for   which   he   had   pleaded   so   dexterously   in 

1857  was  utterly  untenable.  Again  and  again  it  was. 
openly  declared  that  a  strict  and  faithful  adherence  to  the 
Confession,  as  fundamental  in  all  its  doctrinal  state- 
ments, was  "  irrational,  unscriptural  and  unlutheran."' 
(Lutheran  Observer,  November  17,  1865.)  The  demand 
was  made  that  Lutherans  should  no  longer  insist  upon 
such  points  as  fundamental,  "about  which  the  ablest 
theologians  and  most  devout  Christians  have  not  been 

entirely  agreed Sooner  than  yield  on  this  point 

we  would  see  the  Church  perish."  (Lutheran  Observer, 
Dec.  I,  1865.)  Over  against  such  radical  and  sweeping 
declarations,  he  became  perfectly  clear  in  his  mind  that 
there  could  be  no  consistent  medium  between  the  two 
positions,  on  the  one  side  of  an  ex  animo  subscription  to 
a  Confession,  and  on  the  other,  of  an  absolute  rejection 
of  the  Confession  as  any  kind  of  a  test.  While  the  revised 
Constitution  of  the  General  Synod  (of  1864)  claimed  to 
hold  "the  Augsburg  Confession  as  a  correct  exhibition  of 
the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Divine  Word,"  it  was 
evident,  that  the  term  fundamental  had  been  so  abused  as 
to  convert  what  ought  to  be  the  most  solemn  and  well 
defined  of  obligations,  into  a  miserable  sham,  and  the  falsi- 


114  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIU. 

fication  of  language  and  of  history  went  so  far  that  men 
claimed  certain  doctrines  of  the  Augsburg  Confession 
were  so  clearly  not  fundamental,  that  it  became  distinctive 
of  a  true  friend  of  the  General  Synod  so  to  regard  them; 
that,  for  example,  any  one  who  did  not  reject  the  Lutheran 
doctrines  of  Baptism  and  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  or  at  least 
regard  them  as  non-fundamental,  was  not  on  the  basis  of 
the  General  Synod.  Against  such  an  assumption  Dr. 
Krauth,  of  course,  entered  his  decided  protest. 

On  July  13,  1865,  he  published  that  remarkable  declara- 
tion in  which  he  defined  his  position  as  to  fundamentals 
with  a  frank  and  manly  acknowledgment  and  recantation 
of  his  former  "crudities  and  inconsistencies"  on  this 
point.  It  was  this  declaration  which  was  so  highly 
prized  by  Dr.  Walther,  of  St.  Louis,  and  quoted  by  him 
in  his  memorial  notice  after  Dr.  Krauth's  death,  "as  an 
imperishable  monument  of  the  uprightness  and  candor 
of  his  convictions."  These  are  the  closing  paragraphs 
of  the  article  referred  to  ("The  Aimless  Battle")  : 

As  for  ourselves,  we  wish  no  one  who  feels  any  interest 
in  our  opinions,  to  doubt  where  we  stand.  Li  the  matter 
of  self-consistency  there  are  some  things  of  which  we 
should  feel  ashamed,  could  we  be  guilty  of  them;  there 
are  others  in  which  we  would  feel  no  shame  whatever. 
We  do  not  feel  ashamed  to  confess  that  time  and  experi- 
ence have  modified  our  earlier  views,  or  led  us  to  abandon 
them,  if  we  have  so  modified  or  so  forsaken  them.  A 
false  pride  of  consistency  is  the  surest  mark  of  a  little, 
opinionated  pragmatist,  of  the  dumb  watch  among 
thinkers,  whose  hands  are  fixed  at  one,  and  who  keeps 
them  there,  because  he  has  no  spring  within  him  to  move 
them.  Li  Church  and  State  the  last  years  have  wrought 
changes,  deep  and  thorough,  in  every  thinking  man,  and 
on  no  point  more  than  this,  that  compromise  of  principle, 
however  specious,  is  immoral,  and  that  however  guarded 
it  may  be,  it  is  perilous;  and  that  there  is  no  guarantee  of 


1861-67.]  ^.V   HONORABLE   RETRACTION.  115 

peace  in  words  where  men  do  not  agree  in  things.  So 
far,  then,  as  under  influences,  for  which  we  were  not 
responsible,  we  once  believed  that  there  can  be  true  unity 
in  the  Church,  which  does  not  rest  on  the  acceptance  of 
the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  in  one  and  the  same  sense, 
so  far  we  acknowledge  that  time  and  the  movement  of 
God's  providence  have  led  us  to  truer  and  juster  views. 
To  true  unity  of  the  Church  is  necessary  an.  agreement  in 
fundamentals,  and  a  vital  part  of  the  necessity  is  an 
agreement  as  to  what  are  fundamentals.  The  doctrinal 
articles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  are  all  articles  of 
faith,  and  all  articles  of  faith  are  fundamental.  Our 
Church  can  never  have  a  genuine  internal  hartno7iy, 
except  in  the  confession,  without  reservation  or  ambiguity 
of  these  articles,  one  and  all."^  This  is  our  deep  convic- 
tion, and  we  hereby  retract,  before  God  and  His  Church, 
formally,  as  we  have  already  earnestly  and  repeatedly 
done  indirectly,  every  thing  we  have  written  or  said  in 
conflict  with  this  our  present  conviction.  This  we  are 
not  ashamed  to  do.  We  thank  God,  who  has  led  us  to 
see  the  truth,  and  we  thank  Him  for  freeing  us  from  the 
temptation  of  embarrassing  ourselves  with  the  pretence 
of  a  present  absolute  consistency  with  our  earlier,  very 
sincere,  yet  relatively  very  immature  views. 

DR.   KRAUTH's  position   CONCERNING  THE  LORD's  DAY. 

One  of  the  charges  brought  by  the  ''Definite  Platform" 
against  the  Augsburg  Confession  was,  that  it  denied  the 
"divine  obligation  of  the  Christian  Sabbath."  (Vol  I,  p. 
358.)  Without  direct  reference  to  the  Platform  or  to 
its  principal  author,  Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker,  Dr.  Krauth  had 
taken  up  the  Sabbath  question  in  the  Missionary  of  Dr. 
W.  A.  Passavant  in  a  series  of  articles  on  the  "Sabbath 
and  the  Lord's  Day"  (1856).  In  the  declaration  of  the 
Pittsburgh  Synod  against  the  Definite  Platform  which 
was  drawn  up  by  himself,  (1856)  he  had  inserted  the 
formal  protest,  "that  this  Synod  maintains  the  sacred 
*  The  italics  are  from  Dr.  Krauth's  own  hand. 


I  1 6  CHARLES  PORTERFJELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIII. 

obligation  of  the  Lord's  Day."  A  somewhat  fuller 
treatment  of  the  subject,  incorporating  the  articles  in  the 
Missionary,  is  found  in  the  Evangelical  Review  (1857, 
January)  in  a  paper  on  "The  Lutheran  Church  and  the 
Divine  Obligation  of  the  Lord's  Day,"  which  was  simul- 
taneously published  in  a  pamphlet  of  53  pages  by  Henry 
C.  Neinstedt,  Gettysburg.  (1856.)  In  numerous  extracts 
he  presents  first  the  views  of  Luther  and  of  Melanchthon 
on  the  Lord's  Day,  and  then  proceeds  to  an  examination 
of  the  statements  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  He  con- 
tends that  the  articles  on  Abuses,  which  contain  the 
declarations  of  the  Augustana  concerning  the  Lord's  Day, 
are  not  to  be  considered  as  part  of  the  doctrinal  basis  of 
the  General  Synod : 

The  formula  of  subscription  proposed  by  our  General 
Synod  does  not  embrace  that  part  of  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession which  touches  on  the  Sabbath.  The  qualified 
assent  which  that  Formula  demands,  is  to  the  "doctrinal 
articles;"  that  is,  the  first  twenty-one  articles  of  the  Con- 
fession, and  makes  no  reference  whatever  to  the  articles 
on  Abuses,  in  the  seventh  of  which  occurs  what  is  said 
in  regard  to  the  Lord's  Day.  li  the  views  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  on  this  topic  be  erroneous,  we  have 
bound  ourselves  in  no  way,  as  a  part  of  the  General 
Synod,  to  their  adoption  or  defense,  nor  is  any  disclaimer 
necessary  on  our  part.  We  have  never  given  even  a 
qualified  subscription  to  the  articles  on  Abuses.  We 
need  no  new  basis  to  renounce  what  the  old  basis  has 
never  confessed. 

Even  those  who  give  unqualified  subscription  to  the 
entire  Augsburg  Confession,  he  holds,  have  not  thereby 
bound  themselves  to  what  it  says  on  the  Lord's  Day, 
because  "that  subject  is  introduced  incidentally,  is  briefly 
handled  and  simply  as  illustrative  of  another."  The 
article  in  which  it  is  mentioned  treats  of  ecclesiastical 
power   (the  power  of  the  Bishops).     Any  man  might 


i8s6.]  THE    LORD'S    DAY.  Ii; 

accept  its  statements  unreservedly  without  obligating 
himself  to  the  "reception,  as  a  matter  of  course,  of  all  the 
arguments  used  in  it,  or  of  the  illustrations  used  in  its 
defense.  We  may  consider  a  doctrine  impregnable  and 
yet  allow  that  a  particular  defense  of  it  is  very  weak  and 

illogical Every  word   in   the  article  on   Church 

Power  which  alludes  to  the  Lord's  Day  might  be  erased, 
and  yet  its  arguments  remain  impregnable." 

With  great  acumen  he  insists  that  the  points  made  in 
that  article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  are  exclusively 
directed    against    the    presumption    of    the    Romanists, 

against  the  Romish  Levitical  idea,  that  the  obligation 
of  the  sacred  day  is  one  that  arises  from  the  idea  of  the 
necessary  sacredness  of  particular  times,  or  from  ecclesi- 
astical prescription. 

If  we  were  compelled  to  state  very  briefly  the  points  in 
dispute  between  the  Romish  and  the  Evangelical  theo- 
logians, as  regards  the  Lord's  Day,  we  should  say, — • 
Rome  maintained  a  Levitical  necessity,  the  Confessors  a 
moral  necessity ;  Rome  a  Mosaic  distinction,  the  Con- 
fessors a  Christian  distinction ;  Rome  a  prescriptive 
determination,  the  Confessors  a  free  one ;  Rome  a  canon- 
ical observance,  the  Confessors  an  evangelical  one.  Rome 
rested  the  divine  obligation  on  the  necessity  of  the  Sab- 
bath, the  Confessors  on  the  necessity  for  the  Sabbath ;  the 
one  laid  the  foundation  of  the  law  in  the  day,  the  other 
in  man ;  the  one  declared  that  man  was  made  for  the 
Sabbath,  the  other  that  "the  Sabbath  was  made  for  man." 

In  regard  to  the  Apostolic  origin  of  the  Lord's  Day, 
Dr.  Krauth  contends  that  there  is  no  disagreement 
between  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  the  Catechism  of 
the  Council  of  Trent,  which  says: 

"The  Apostles  resolved  to  consecrate  the  first  day  of 
the  seven  to  divine  worship  and  called  it  the  Lord's  day." 
Is  there  in  the  Augsburg  Confession  a  solitary  hint  of  the 
denial  of  the  Apostolic  origin  of  the  Lord's  day?     Not 


1 1  8  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIII. 

one When   the   Confessors   say   "the   Christian 

Church  has  ordained  Sunday,"  they  do  not  mean  to  make 
an  antithesis  between  the  Church  and  the  Apostles,  as 
much  as  to  say,  the  Church  and  not  the  Apostles,  ordained 
it.  It  is  between  the  Christian  Church,  the  body  of  Christ 
in  its  primitive  purity,  including  the  Apostles,  and  guided 
by  their  infallible  direction,  and  the  Romish  Church,  they 
design  to  make  the  antithesis. 

After  quoting  the  testimony  of  a  number  of  prominent 
Lutheran  theologians  who  hold  that  the  appointment  of 
one  day  in  seven  is  a  divine  law  of  general  and  lasting 
obligation,  he  sums  up  his  position  on  the  whole  question 
in  the  following  points  which,  thirteen  years  later,  were 
incorporated  in  the  explanatory  notes  appended  to  his 
edition  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  :* 

1.  The  law  that  one  day  in  seven  shall  be  set  apart  for 
the  service  of  God,  has  existed  by  divine  command,  from 
the  foundation  of  the  world,  and  its  obligation  is  a  part 
of  the  original  law  of  nature. 

2.  The  command  was  repeated  in  the  Decalogue  and  in 
the  Mosaic  law,  with  specific  ceremonial  characteristics 
adapting  it  to  the  Jewish  nation. 

3.  The  law  itself,  generically  considered,  is  of  per- 
petual and  universal  obligation ;  its  specific  ceremonial 
characteristics  pertain  only  to  the  Jews. 

4.  The  law  itself  has  never  been  abrogated;  the  specific 
ceremonial  characteristics  have  been. 

5.  To  keep  one  day  in  seven  holy  to  God,  to  abstain 
from  all  that  may  conflict  with  its  sanctification,  is 
generic,  not  specific ;  moral,  not  ceremonial. 

6.  The  obligation  to  keep  holy  the  seventh  day,  or  Sat- 
urday, is  ceremonial  and  not  binding  on  Christians. 

7.  The  resurrection  of  Christ,  His  successive  appear- 
ings,  the  Pentecostal  effusion  of  His  Spirit,  on  the  first 

*  The  Augsburg  Confession  literally  translated  from  the  original 
Latin,  with  the  most  important  additions  of  the  German  text  incorpo- 
rated :  together  with  the  General  Creeds  ;  and  an  Introduction,  Notes 
and  Analytic  Index.    By  Charles  P.  Krauth.  D.D.    Philadelphia,  1869. 


1856.]  THE  LORD'S  DAY.  I  Iq 

day  of  the  week,  together  with  the  example  of  the  Apos- 
tles, and  of  the  ApostoHc  Church,  have  shown  to  the 
Church  what  day  in  the  seven  may,  under  the  New  Dis- 
pensation, most  fitly  be  kept  holy,  and  have  led  to  the 
substitution  of  the  first  day  of  the  week  for  the  seventh 
as  the  Christian  Sabbath. 

8.  To  keep  holy  the  first  day  of  the  week,  to  consecrate 
it  to  God,  and  to  this  end  to  abstain  upon  it  from  all  works 
except  those  of  necessity,  mercy  and  the  service  of  God, 
is  obligatory  on  all  men. 

Having  thus  recorded  the  position  of  Dr.  Krauth  on 
"The  Divine  Obligation  of  the  Lord's  Day,"  we  feel 
bound  to  add  a  few  words  of  explanation  to  our  narra- 
tive. The  views  set  forth  in  the  above  quoted  summary 
were  undoubtedly  held  by  him  even  in  later  years,  possi- 
bly to  the  end  of  his  life.  But,  we  feel  assured,  that,  if 
his  essay  on  the  ''Sabbath"  had  been  incorporated  into 
his  "Conservative  Reformation,"  as  he  originally  intended 
to  do,  it  would  have  undergone  considerable  modification, 
if  not  in  its  final  conclusions,  certainly  in  the  line  of  its 
arguments.  We  must  not  forget  that  the  treatise  from 
which  his  views  are  quoted  belongs  to  the  year  1856.  It 
manifestly  bears  the  marks  of  that  period  of  his  life  over 
against  later  and  more  mature  developments. 

The  distinction,  in  his  reference  to  the  doctrinal  basis 
of  the  General  Synod,  drawn  by  Dr.  Krauth  between  the 
first  twenty-one  articles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and 
the  last  seven  articles  on  Abuses,  is  in  full  accord  with 
the  position  held  in  those  days  by  the  author  of  the  "Defi- 
nite Platform,"  who  omitted  those  articles  entirely  from 
his  "American  Recension  of  the  Augsburg  Confession," 
while  the  later  Dr.  Krauth  accepted  that  second  section 
of  the  Augustana  with  its  antithesis  against  prevailing 
Abuses,  as  an  equally  integral  part  of  the  Lutheran  Con- 
fession. 

The  objections  of  the  American  Lutherans  to  the  atti- 


120  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XUl. 

tude  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  on  the  doctrine  of  the 
Lord's  Day  arose  from  their  legaHstic  and  puritanic  views 
on  this  point,  so  radically  different  from  and  opposed  to 
the  Evangelical  spirit  of  the  Confession.  While  Dr. 
Krauth  has  a  great  deal  to  say  on  the  antithesis  between 
Rome  and  our  Confession,  he  is  silent  on  the  antithesis 
between  the  Sabbatarian  legalism  of  the  Puritans  and  the 
Evangelical,  Scriptural  position  of  the  Lutheran  Confes- 
sion.* The  very  language  he  employs,  in  constantly 
speaking  of  "the  fourth  commandment,"  and  the  "Sab- 
bath," seems  to  indicate  that  he  was,  at  the  time,  to  a 
considerable  extent,  still  under  the  bias  of  his  early  train- 
ing and  environments. 

We  are  convinced  that  his  distinction  between  the 
"Christian  Church  in  its  primitive  purity"  as  over  against 
the  "Romish  Church"  is  out  of  place  in  the  above  quoted 
reference  to  the  Augsburg  Confession.  When  the  Con- 
fessors say  "the  Christian  Church  has  ordained  Sunday," 
they  clearly  intend  to  represent  the  appointment  of  that 
first  day  in  the  week  as  a  chiirchly  institution  and  arrange- 
ment, over  against  a  positive  and  direct  divine  revelation 
and  commandment.  And,  being  an  appointment  of  the 
Church,  the  selection  of  that  particular  day  belongs  to 
the  sphere  of  liberty  and  not  of  law.  It  is  human,  a 
matter  of  good  order  and  charity.  The  State,  indeed, 
may  make  Sunday-Laws,  and  Christians  are  bound  to 
obey  them,  under  the  fourth  (fifth)  commandment;  and 

*The  Definite  Platform  says  (pp.  27  and  28)  :  "Our  American 
churches  beUeve  in  the  divine  institution  and  obligation  of  the  Chris- 
tian Sabbath.  We  therefore  reject  the  doctrine  taught  in  the  former 
Symbolical  books  in  which  the  Sabbath  is  treated  as  a  mere  Jewish 
institution,  and  supposed  to  be  totally  revoked  ;  whilst  the  propriety 
of  retaining  it  as  a  day  of  religious  worship,  is  supposed  to  rest  only 
on  the  argument  of  the  churches  for  the  convenience  of  general  con- 
vocation." See  also  Dr  S.  S.  Schmucker,  Lutheran  Manual,  1855, 
The  Lord's  Day  or  Christian  Sabbath,  pp.  310-324. 


1856.]         THE   CATECHISMS   OX   THE  SABBATH.  121 

they  are  thankful  for  the  protection  they  afford  to  the 
laboring  man  and  the  worshipping  congregations.  But 
the  Church,  as  the  assembly  of  believers  under  the  Gospel 
of  Jesus  Christ  and  entrusted  with  the  administration  of 
the  means  of  grace,  does  not  lay  down  a  law  concerning 
set  times  and  days,  as  by  divine  authority. 

It  certainly  is  a  remarkable  feature  in  Dr.  Krauth's 
treatment  of  this  whole  subject,  that  he  does  not  introduce 
tiie  explicit  testimony  of  other  Confessional  Standards  on 
this  topic,  except  a  very  brief  quotation  from  the  Large 
Catechism,  which  appears  under  "Luther's  views  of  the 
Sabbath."  In  fact,  from  his  reference  to  the  "Confes- 
sion" the  reader  might  be  led  to  believe  that  the  official 
standards  of  the  Lutheran  Church  contained  no  clearly 
'defined  doctrine  concerning  the  Lord's  Day  at  all.  The 
Augustana,  he  says,  introduces  it  only  "incidentally," 
handles  it  quite  "briefly  and  simply  illustrative  of  another 
subject."  And  consequently  he  holds  even  those  who 
accept  the  entire  Confession  not  bound  thereby  to  a  certain 
fixed  doctrinal  standard  concerning  the  Lord's  Day. 

But  the  question  at  once  suggests  itself,  what  about  our 
Catechisms,  especially  the  very  full  testimony  of  the 
Large  Catechism,  written  by  Martin  Luther  in  1529,  and 
formally  approved  as  one  of  the  official  standards  of  our 
Church  in  the  Formula  of  Concord  of  1577  ?  Let  us  hear 
some  of  its  declarations  in  its  exposition  of  the  third 
^commandment  of  the  Decalogue : 

In  the  Old  Testament  God  has  set  apart  the  seventh 
-day  to  be  observed,  commanding  His  people  to  keep  it 
holy  above  all  other  days.  This  commandment  .... 
is  given  to  the  Jews  exclusively  ....  it  does  not  apply 
to  us  Christians.  But  we  keep  the  holy  days  of  rest 
(Feiertage)  first  of  all  on  account  of  the  body  and  its 
needs,  as  nature  also  teaches  and  demands  for  the  com- 
mon people,  men  and  maid-servants  who  have  attended 


122  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Ckav.XUI. 

to  their  work  and  trade  throughout  the  whole  week,  that 
they  may  withdraw  from  it  for  a  day  of  rest,  and  refresh 
themselves.  In  the  second  place  chiefly  for  this  reason 
that  on  such  day  of  rest  time  may  be  taken  for  divine 
worship,  so  that  we  may  assemble  for  the  hearing  and 
ministering  of  the  Word  of  God.  But  with  us  this  is  not 
so  bound  to  a  certain  time  as  with  the  Jews,  that  it  must 
needs  be  this  or  that  day.  For  in  itself  no  day  is  better 
than  another,  and  these  things,  indeed,  ought  to  be  done 
daily.  But  since  the  mass  of  the  people  cannot  possibly 
attend  to  it,  at  least  one  day  in  the  week  must  be  devoted 

to  it How  then  is  this  day  kept  holy?     Not  by 

abstaining  from  hard  labor  or  putting  on  our  best  clothes, 
but  by  ministering  the  Word  of  God  and  being  occupied 
with  it. 

This  position  is  also  maintained  in  the  brief  and  con- 
cise exposition  of  this  commandment  in  the  Small  Cate- 
chism: "We  should  so  fear  and  love  God,  as  not  to 
despise  His  Word  and  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel ;  but 
deem  it  holy,  and  willingly  hear  and  learn  it."  This 
statement  is  significant  in  what  it  says  as  well  as  in  what 
it  omits.  It  avoids  the  term  Sabbath.  It  makes  no  refer- 
ence whatever  to  set  times  or  days  as  appointed  by  divine 
authority,  which  is  the  one  chief  thing  in  the  Westminster 
Catechism's  explanation  of  this  commandment.  It  sim- 
ply finds  the  abiding  moral  duty  and  obligation  of  all 
men,  under  this  commandment  in  this,  that  we  should 
worship  God  by  deeming  holy  His  blessed  Word  and  by 
hearing  and  learning  it  willingly;  for  the  Lord's  Day  is 
the  Word's  Day.  In  the  light  of  the  two  Catechisms  the 
language  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  must  be  interpreted 
when  it  says  of  the  Lord's  Day  : 

What  then  are  we  to  think  of  the  Sunday  and  like  rites 
in  the  house  of  God  ?  To  this  we  answer  that  it  is  lawful 
for  bishops  or  pastors  to  make  ordinances  that  things  be 
done  orderly  in  the  Church  ....  not  that  consciences 


1856.1  DR.    JACOBS'    POSITION.  123 

be  bound  to  judge  them  necessary  services  and  to  think 
that  it  is  a  sin  to  break  them  without  offense  to  others. 
....  Of  this  kind  is  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  Day, 
Easter,  Pentecost  and  hke  holy  days  and  rites.  For  those 
who  judge  that  by  the  authority  of  the  Church  the 
observance  of  the  Lord's  Day  instead  of  the  Sabbath  day, 
was    ordained    as    a    thing    necessary,    do    greatly    err. 

Scripture  has  abrogated  the  Sabbath  Day And 

yet,  because  it  was  necessary  to  appoint  a  certain  day,  that 
the  people  might  know  when  they  ought  to  come  together, 
it  appears  that  the  Church  designated  the  Lord's  Day 
for  this  purpose ;  and  this  day  seems  to  have  been  chosen 
all  the  more  for  this  additional  reason,  that  men  might 
have  an  example  of  Christian  liberty,  and  might  know 
that  the  keeping  neither  of  the  Sabbath,  nor  of  any  other 
day  is  necessary. 

These  statements,  it  seems  to  us,  clearly  define  the 
official  position  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  as 
over  against  any  kind  of  Sabbatarianism,  even  in  its 
mildest  form.  This  has  been  fully  proved  by  Dr. 
Krauth's  successor  in  the  chair  of  systematic  theology  in 
the  Philadelphia  Seminary,  in  a  strong  article,  written 
by  him  when  he  was  quite  a  young  man.  The  Sabbath 
Question,  in  its  historical  relations  and  bearings  upon 
the  faith  and  life  of  the  Church,  by  H.  E.  Jacobs,  A.  M., 
Phillipsburg,  Pa.  (The  Evangelical  Quarterly  Review, 
1869,  pp.  524-555.)  There  he  treats  of  the  Antinomian, 
the  Sabbatarian  and  the  Dominical  views  of  the  Lord's 
Day,  and  shows  convincingly  that  the  position  taken  in 
the  Lutheran  Confessions,  the  Catechisms  and  the 
Augustana,  is  the  only  tenable  one.  over  against  all  kinds 
of  Sabbatarianism.  The  scholarly  treatment  of  this 
question  by  the  young  "Magister"  so  delighted  the  chair- 
man of  the  Faculty  of  the  theological  seminary,  the  ven- 
erable Dr.  C.  F.  Schaeffer,  that  he  addressed  a  most 
enthusiastic   letter   to   his   young    friend,    (October    14, 


124  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  Xlll. 

1869)  in  which  he  says:  "The  views  which  you  present 
and  defend  with  such  varied  learning  and  consummate 
skill,  I  have  myself  always  entertained.  But  I  confess 
that  while  I  was  fully  convinced  in  my  own  mind,  I  was 
not  aware  how  absolutely  impregnable  my  position  was. 
....  Every  word  that  you  have  written  is,  to  use  a 
German  idiom,  'spoken  out  of  my  soul.'  " 

About  ten  years  later  the  Sunday  question  was  dis- 
cussed in  the  Lutheran  pastoral  association  of  Philadel- 
phia, which  at  that  time  held  its  meetings  in  the  lecture 
room  of  Zion's  German  Lutheran  Church.  Dr.  Krauth 
submitted  a  series  of  theses  on  the  subject,  presenting 
essentially  the  same  views  which  he  had  embodied  in  his 
annotations  to  the  Augsburg  Confession  (1869).  In 
the  debate  he  was  opposed  by  Drs.  W.  J.  Mann  and 
A.  Spaeth,  and  the  request  was  made  that  he  state  the 
difference  between  himself  and  Dr.  Jacobs  on  this  subject. 
He  thus  refers  to  it  in  a  letter  to  Dr.  Jacobs  (March  2, 
1878)  :  "At  the  Pastoral  Conference,  yesterday,  I  pre- 
sented at  their  request  Theses  on  the  Sabbath.  I  was 
asked  what  was  the  difference  between  your  views  and 
mine.  I  stated  the  differences  as  I  understand  them  and 
the  points  of  agreement,  and  said  I  did  not  believe  there 
was  any  radical  difference,  certainly  none  of  a  practical 
kind.  The  discussion  was  a  very  animated  and  inter- 
esting one." 

It  is  due  to  Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs  to  state  that  in  writing  on 
the  Sunday  question  he  had  no  idea  or  intention  of 
antagonizing  Dr.  Krauth's  views,  formerly  published  on 
the  same  subject.  Concerning  the  Sunday  question,  he 
writes  to  Dr.  Krauth,  in  answer  to  the  above  quoted 
letter  (March  13,  1878)  : 

My  articles  were  prepared  without  reference  to 
what  you  had  written  on  the  same  subject.  When  Rev. 
Bassler,  as  President  of  the  Pittsburg  Synod,  assigned 


i869.]  LUTHERAN    SABBATARIANS.  125 

me  the  topic  (in  the  examination  as  a  Hcentiate)  I  under- 
took to  investigate  the  subject,  as  far  as  I  could,  inde- 
pendently, for  fear  that  I  might  be  unconsciously  influ- 
enced by  your  position.  It  was  only  a  part  of  the  pro- 
cess, by  which  I  had  tried  to  go  over  the  entire  system 
of  doctrine  and  form  an  independent  judgment  with 
some  of  the  dogmaticians  as  my  guide.  When  my  paper 
attracted  more  notice  than  I  had  expected,  I  was  afraid 
to  examine  your  article  for  fear  that  I  might  find  a  con- 
siderable difference,  and  my  paper  might  appear  to  have 
the  design  of  antagonizing  what  you  had  previously 
written,  which  I  did  not  wish  to  do;  as  the  subject  was 
not  of  my  own  choosing.  In  examining  the  matter 
since,  I  believe  that  the  only  point  of  difference  can  be  as 
to  the  moral  obligation  to  devote  one  day  in  seven  to 
peculiarly  religious  duties,  upon  the  ground  of  the  third 
commandment.  The  position  of  Gerhard,  Quenstedt 
and  Calovius  I  have  a  great  difficulty  in  reconciling  with 
that  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  many  of  Luther's  state- 
ments, and  of  Chemnitz,  Brentz  and  the  divines  of  the 
first  and  second  periods. 

The  historical  facts,  then,  to  be  remembered  in  this 
connection,  are  these.  From  the  very  beginning  there 
have  been  some  prominent  Lutheran  theologians  who,  in 
their  teachings  concerning  the  Lord's  Day,  do  not  confine 
themselves  to  the  statements  of  the  Confessions,  but 
going  beyond  them,  emphasize  another  side  on  which  the 
standards  of  the  Lutheran  Church  are,  as  we  believe, 
intentionally  silent.  The  Confessions,  as  we  have  seen, 
have  nothing  to  say  of  a  divine  appointment  of  a  certain 
day,  or  of  one  day  in  seven  divinely  ordained  for  wor- 
ship. They  do  not  consider  this  as  part  of  the  moral 
abiding  and  universally  binding  law  in  the  third  com- 
mandment. But  those  theologians  hold  that  it  is  by 
direct  divine  appointment  that  one  day  in  seven  has  been 
set  apart  for  divine  worship.  Luther  himself,  in  spite 
of  the  clear  utterances  of  his  Catechisms,  has  many  pas- 


126  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  Xlll. 

sages  that  seem  to  uphold  this  view.  Some  of  the 
writers  of  the  Formula  of  Concord,  Chytraeus,  Andreae, 
Selnecker,  and  some  of  our  great  dogmaticians,  like 
Gerhard,  Calovius,  Quenstedt  are  of  the  same  mind  on  this 
doctrine.  And  Dr.  Krauth  also,  evidently,  represents  this 
mild  type  of  Sabbatarianism,  which  holds  that  the  obser- 
vance of  one  day  in  seven  belongs,  not  to  the  ceremonial, 
but  to  the  moral  law. 


1 


FOURTEENTH  CHAPTER. 

THE  CRISIS  IN  THE  GENERAL  SYNOD. 
1864-1867. 

The  conflict  between  the  "American  Lutherans  "  and 
the  Conservatives  ("  SymboHsts  ")  which  had  so  long 
agitated  the  Church,  culminated  in  the  conventions  of  the 
General  Synod  at  York,  Pa.  (1864),  and  Fort  Wayne, 
Ind.  (1866),  the  establishment  of  the  Theological  Sem- 
inary in  Philadelphia  (1864)  and  the  organization  of  the 
•General  Council  (1867). 

As  the  time  for  the  twenty-first  convention  of  the  Gen- 
eral Synod  was  drawing  near  Dr.  Krauth  once  more 
sounded  the  voice  of  solemn  warning  and  admonition  in 
the  Lutheran  (May  5,  1864)  : 

Let  there  be  pure  love  for  each  other  and  just  forbear- 
ance where  there  are  conscientious  differences,  but  let 
there  be  also  a  deep  love  for  the  truth  and  fraternal 
plainness  of  speech.  Men  cannot  build  together  unless 
they  are  agreed  as  to  what  shall  be  built.  We,  who  are, 
in  our  inmost  souls,  convinced  that  the  faith  of  our 
Church,  in  whole  and  in  each  of  its  parts,  is  the  very  truth 
-of  God's  Word,  cannot  believe  in  the  hearty  sympathy  and 
co-working  of  those  who  regard  that  faith  as  unscrip- 
tural,  Romanizing  and  soul-destroying.  We  ask,  as  a 
simple  matter  of  justice,  as  a  matter  of  cogent  necessity, 
involving  the  very  peace  and  life  of  the  Church,  that  men 
who  bear  the  same  hallowed  name  with  us,  shall  cease  to 
assail  the  faith,  apart  from  which,  that  name,  as  a 
church-name,  is  deceitful  and  illusive.  With  the  brethren 
not  perfectly  one  with  us.  but  who  treat  the  confessed 
■faith  of  our  Church  justly,  fairly  and  re\'erently,  we  can 

127 


128  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

heartily  labor,  looking  for  and  praying  for  that  time, 
surely  coming,  when  God  shall  bring  us  to  see  eye  to 
eye,  when  He  shall  have  ripened  us  for  an  unequivocal 
confession  together  of  the  whole  truth.  But  with  those 
who  regard  the  looseness  which  rationalism  has  brought 
into  our  Church  as  normal,  a  thing  to  be  perpetuated  as 
good  in  itself,  with  these  all  unity  is  impossible,  and  the 
sooner  the  attempt  to  keep  it  up  is  abandoned,  the  better. 

A  few  days  before  this  was  written  the  Lutheran 
Observer  also  had  given  its  advice  and  instructions  for 
the  approaching  convention,  after  this  manner:  "No 
time  should  be  wasted  by  the  discussion  of  controverted 
points  of  doctrine  pertaining  to  the  sacraments.  We  are 
all  sufficiently  Lutheran.  We  can  afford  to  tolerate  some 
degree  of  diversity  on  non-essentials.  All  the  ministers 
and  churches  of  the  General  Synod  are  evangelical.  The 
object  aimed  at  by  our  General  Synod  should  be  to  pro- 
mote harmony  of  feeling  and  co-operation  between  our 
Synods  and  churches  in  the  great  work  of  evangelizing 
the  world,  and  bringing  all  the  baptized  children  into  the 
spiritual  fold  of  the  Redeemer.  Not  a  word  should  be 
spoken,  not  a  resolution  offered,  calculated  to  offend  any 
brother,  or  wound  any  portion  of  the  Lutheran  body." 

Dr.  Krauth  himself,  at  that  time  still  a  member  of  the 
East  Pennsylvania  Synod,  was  not  a  delegate  to  the  con- 
vention at  York,  but  attended  it  as  a  visitor.  The  Presi- 
dent of  the  General  Synod,  Dr.  B.  Kurtz,  being  unable 
to  be  present,  had  appointed  Dr.  S.  Sprecher,  of  Spring- 
field, Ohio,  to  preach  the  opening  sermon.  It  made  no 
special  reference  to  the  controversy  in  the  Church,  but 
treated  of  "The  Responsibility  of  the  Church  of  God  dur- 
ing the  Present  National  Crisis,"  from  the  text :  Esther 
iv.  13,  14.  Dr.  Sprecher  was  elected  President.  The  diffi- 
culty in  the  convention  arose  through  the  application  of 
the  Franckean  Synod  for  admission  into  the  General 
Synod.     In  the  year  1837  this  Synod  had  been  formed  in 


i864.]         APPLICATION  OF  FRANCKEAN  SYNOD.  j  29 

Western  New  York  through  the  secession  of  some  mem- 
bers of  the  Hartwick  Synod.  They  had  never  received 
the  Augsburg  Confession,  considering  it  "  antiquated  and 
unfit  for  the  present  age."  In  its  place  they  had  substi- 
tuted a  Confession  or  "  Declaration  "  of  their  own  faith, 
utterly  ignoring  the  distinctive  doctrines  of  the  Lutheran 
Church.  Vice  Chancellor  L.  H.  Sanford,  in  a  case  before 
the  court  in  New  York,  had  decided  (July,  1844),  that 
"  The  Rule  and  Standard  established  by  the  Franckean 
Synod  is  essentially  different  and  fundamentally  at  vari- 
ance with  the*  Rule  and  Standard  of  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church,  established  and  declared  by  the  Augs- 
burg Confession  of  Faith."  The  Committee  to  whom 
the  application  of  the  Franckeans  had  been  referred, 
reported  through  their  chairman,  Dr.  H.  N.  Pohlman, 
"  That  the  Franckean  Synod  be  admitted,  as  an  integral 
portion  of  the  General  Synod,  as  soon  as  they  shall  give 
formal  expression  to  their  adoption  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  as  received  by  the  General  Synod."  This 
was  on  Friday,  May  6,  the  second  day  of  the  Convention. 
In  the  joy  of  his  heart  Dr.  Krauth,  giving  a  summary 
report  of  the  proceedings  up  to  this  point,  writes  to  the 
Lutheran. 

The  most  important  question  rising  on  the  first  day  of 
the  meeting  was  as  to  the  reception  of  the  Franckean 
Synod.  The  vital  question  was :  Is  that  body  on  the 
basis  of  the  General  Synod?  and  this  at  once  raised  the 
question :  What  is  that  basis,  and  where  is  it  authorita- 
tively stated?  It  was  refreshing  to  find  that  the  views 
maintained  in  the  Lutheran  as  to  how  that  basis  is  to  be 
determined  were  generally  acknowledged  as  correct,  even 
by  men  who  have  for  months  been  combating  them,  to 
wit :  that  it  is  to  be  settled  by  the  Constitution  of  the 
General  Synod,  and  not  by  mere  recommendations  which 
no  Synod  is  bound  to  accept,  which  many  Synods  have 
declined  to  receive,  and  which  the  General  Synod  itself 
9 


J30  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

has  seemed  to  withdraw For  some  time  it  seemed 

to  be  a  foregone  conclusion  that  the  Franckean  Synod 
would  be  voted  in;  but  as  the  facts  were  developed,  a 
change  began  to  be  manifest,  the  friends  of  truth  stood 
firmly  to  their  position,  men  who  are  strong  in  the  confi- 
dence of  the  radicals,  without  themselves  being  radical, 
took  the  right  ground The  result  has  been  a  won- 
derful victory  of  principle  over  impulse,  and  gives  proof 
that  truth  is  winning  its  way  in  our  Church  over  against 
all  the  open  opposition  and  secret  combination  which  are 
directed  against  it.  The  discussion  was  throughout 
fraternal,  warm,  but  never  violent,  and  its  result  will  be 
good.  It  is  a  grand  testimony  to  the  fact  that  men  begin 
to  feel  that  the  name  of  our  Church  means  something, 
and  that  consistency  requires  that  terms  and  things 
should  bear  some  sort  of  relation  to  each  other.  We 
would  add,  that  it  was  very  evident  that  the  tendency  in 
the  Franckean  Synod  had  been  for  a  long  time  one  of 
recession  from  its  extreme  laxity  and  unchurchliness,  and 
it  would  give  general  satisfaction  if  it  would  plant  itself 
unmistakeably  on  the  old  foundation,  and  in  no  heart 
would  the  feeling  of  joy  be  deeper  than  in  those  of  the 
men  who,  in  faithfulness  and  love,  have  opposed  its 
immediate  admission.  We  are  sure  that  the  course 
recommended  by  the  General  Synod  is  all  that  is  necessary 
to  give  a  place  in  the  hearty  confidence  of  the  whole 
Church  to  the  Franckean  Synod.  This  is  a  crisis  in  its 
history,  and  as  it  uses  that  crisis  its  future  will  take  its 
shape. 

Unfortunately  the  gratification  and  joy  expressed  in 
these  words  were  not  to  be  long-lived.  Before  his  com- 
munication to  the  Lutheran  was  mailed  Dr.  Krauth  had 
to  add  a  "Postscript,"  on  Monday  afternoon,  announcing 
that  the  vote  concerning  the  Franckean  Synod  had  been 
reconsidered,  and  that  it  had,  after  all,  been  actually 
admitted  into  the  General  Synod.  On  Saturday  morning 
the  delegates  of  the  Franckean  Synod  were  permitted  to 


1864.]  FRANCKEAN  SYNOD  RECEIVED.  131 

lay  a  communication  before  the  General  Synod,  stating, 
that  "  in  adopting  the  Constitution  of  the  General  Synod 
the  members  of  the  Franckean  Synod  fully  understood 
that  they  were  adopting  the  doctrinal  position  of  the 
General  Synod,  viz.,  that  the  fundamental  truths  of  the 
Word  of  God  are  taught  in  a  manner  substantially  correct 
in  the  Augsburg  Confession."  This  led  to  a  reconsidera- 
tion of  the  previous  action,  and  a  renewed  discussion  of 
the  whole  case,  which  resulted  in  the  final  decision,  "  That 
the  Franckean  Synod  is  hereby  received  into  connection 
with  the  General  Synod,  with  the  understanding  that  said 
Synod,  at  its  next  meeting,  declare,  in  an  official  manner, 
its  adoption  of  the  doctrinal  articles  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  as  a  substantially  correct  exhibition  of  the 
fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Word  of  God."  The  Ayes 
and  Nays  being  called,  the  vote  stood  97  against  40,  with 
two  being  excused  from  voting.  The  credentials  of  the 
Franckean  delegates  were  then  presented  and  their  names 
entered  upon  the  roll  of  the  General  Synod.  The  chair- 
man of  the  Pennsylvania  delegation.  Dr.  C.  W.  Schaeffer, 
at  once  gave  notice  that  he  and  others  would  enter  their 
protest  against  this  action.  This  was  done  on  the  follow- 
ing Tuesday.  The  protest  declared  that  by  this  action 
the  General  Synod's  Constitution  had  been  "  sadly  and 
lamentably  violated.  The  Constitution  ....  provides 
for  the  admission  of  regularly  constituted  Lutheran 
Synods  solely.  A  regularly  constituted  Lutheran  Synod 
is  one  that  "  holds  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Bible, 
as  taught  by  our  Church."  By  universal  consent  these 
doctrines,  so  taught,  are  expressed  in  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession. The  whole  history  of  the  Franckean  Synod 
presents  it  as  having  no  relation  nor  connection  whatever 
with  the  Augsburg  Confession;  and  upon  diligent  exam- 
ination of  its  official  documents  we  have  failed  to  discover 
any  evidence  that  it  has  ever  accepted  of  said  Confession. 
It    is    therefore    not    a    regularly    constituted    Lutheran 


132  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chav.XW. 

Synod,  and  by  admitting  it  as  an  integral  part  of  the 
General  Synod,  the  General  Synod  has  violated  its  Con- 
stitution." This  protest  was  signed  by  the  whole  Penn- 
sylvania delegation,  C.  W.  Schaeffer,  G.  F.  Krotel,  B.  M. 
Schmucker,  G.  A.  Wenzel,  B.  W.  Schmauk,  C.  F. 
Welden,  L.  L.  Houpt,  C.  F.  Norton,  C.  Pretz,  J.  Reichard, 
and  by  members  of  the  following  Synods :  Pitts- 
burgh (4),  New  York  (4),  Illinois  (3),  Maryland  (2), 
East  Pennsylvania  (i),  Ohio  (i),  Olive  Branch, 
Indiana  (i).  Northern  Illinois  (i),  Iowa  (i) — 28  in  all. 
In  addition  to  this  protest  the  Pennsylvania  delegation 
presented  a  paper  declaring  their  withdrawal  from  the 
sessions  of  the  General  Synod,  in  order  to  report  to  the 
Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania  at  its  approaching  conven- 
tion, as  they  were  bound  to  do  under  the  resolutions  of 
their  Synod  at  the  time  of  its  reunion  with  the  General 
Synod  (1853),  that  "should  the  General  Synod  violate 
its  Constitution  and  require  of  our  Synod  assent  to  any- 
thing conflicting  with  the  old  and  long  established  faith 
of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  then  our  delegates 
are  hereby  required  to  protest  against  such  action,  to 
withdraw  from  its  sessions  and  to  report  to  this  body."* 
(See  Vol  I,  p.  351.) 

The  withdrawal  of  the  Pennsylvania  delegation 
naturally  created  a  profound  sensation,  and  the  matter 
was  regarded  with  serious  apprehensions  for  the  future 
of  the  General  Synod.  The  whole  course  of  the  pro- 
tracted discussion  had  demonstrated  the  necessity  of 
defining  more  clearly  what  the  General  Synod  understood 
by  the  term  "  regularly  constituted  Lutheran  Synods." 
The  unsatisfactory  character  of  the  language  of  its  Con- 
stitution on  this  important  point  was  fully  recognized, 

*Dr.  Chas  Phil.  Krauth  said  :  The  admission  of  the  Franckean 
Synod  was  an  outrage  which  fully  justified  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  in 
withdrawing.  But  they  9Ught  to  have  considered  themselves  as  out 
and  not  sought  to  return. 


1864.]  DR.  POHLMAN'S  AMENDMENT.  133 

and,  to  meet  the  case,  Dr.  H.  N,  Pohlman  offered  the 
following  amendment  of  the  article  referring  to  the 
admission  of  Synods :  "All  regularly  constituted 
Lutheran  Synods  not  now  in  connection  with  the  General 
Synod,  receiving  and  holding  with  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church  of  our  fathers,  the  Word  of  God  as 
contained  in  the  Canonical  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  as  the  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  prac- 
tice, and  the  Augsburg  Confession  as  a  correct  exhibition 
of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Divine  Word,  and  of 
the  faith  of  our  Church  founded  upon  that  Word,  may, 
at  any  time,  become  associated  with  the  General  Synod, 
by  complying  with  the  requirement  of  this  constitution, 
according  to  the  ratio  specified  in  Art.  2d."  This 
proposed  amendment  was  favorably  entertained  by  the 
General  Synod,  and  ordered  to  be  sent  down  through  the 
Secretary  to  the  several  District  Synods  for  final  action. 
Compared  with  the  original  constitution  of  the  General 
Synod  it  undoubtedly  represented  a  far  more  definite 
and  positive  statement  of  the  doctrinal  basis  of  the  body. 
Moreover,  the  General  Synod,  at  the  motion  of  Dr.  W. 
A.  Passavant,  adopted,  in  all  its  essential  features,  the 
action  of  the  Pittsburgh  Synod,  framed  in  1856,  by  Dr. 
Krauth,  defending  the  Augsburg  Confession  against  the 
charge  of  alleged  errors,  and  the  changes  proposed  in  the 
"Definite  Platform."  (See  Vol.  I,  pp.  377-379.)  Thus, 
for  a  while,  the  disintegrating  process  in  the  General 
Synod  seemed  to  be  arrested,  and  a  day  of  better  under- 
standing seemed  to  dawn  with  these  important  conces- 
sions made  to  the  conservative  side  of  the  house.  The 
Lutheran  Observer  greeted  the  action  of  the  General 
Synod,  on  the  last  day  of  its  convention,  in  an  enthusiastic 
editorial:  "Now  we  know  where  we  stand,  and  there 
is  no  longer  room  for  controversy  and  the  personal  abuse 
of  intolerant  exclusionists.  We  all  stand  on  the  Augs- 
burg   Confession,    with    the    qualifications    and    moral 


134  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chat.  XIV. 

restrictions,  defined  in  the  accompanying  resolutions,  so 
that  we  are  true  Lutherans  ....  without  hyper-ortho- 
doxy and  exclusivism  on  the  one  hand,  or  radicahsm  on 
the  other."  And  even  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  looked 
upon  the  action  of  the  General  Synod  as  the  indication 
"  of  an  earnest  desire  to  stand  firmly  and  faithfully  upon 
the  true  basis  of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  and 
to  prevent  forever  the  reception  of  any  Synod  which 
could  not  and  would  not  stand  upon  this  basis."  While 
the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania  heartily  approved  of  the 
withdrawal  of  its  delegates  in  York,  it  was,  nevertheless, 
generally  acknowledged  that  "the  conservative  course  of 
the  General  Synod  after  the  withdrawal  of  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Synod's  delegation,  had  removed  all  disposition  to 
sever  its  connection  with  the  General  Synod,  and  that  it 
was  the  duty  of  the  Mother  Synod  to  retain  its  connection 
undisturbed,  and  to  labor  on,  in  the  General  Synod,  for 
the  welfare  of  our  beloved  Lutheran  Zion  in  this  land." 

These  bright  hopes  and  expectations,  however,  were 
doomed  to  disappointment.  Within  a  few  months  it 
became  manifest  that,  for  the  time  being,  the  General 
Synod  was  not  ready  to  insist  on  a  loyal  and  unreserved 
reception  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  on  the  part  of  its 
District  Synods. 

Dr.  B.  Kurtz,  almost  hovering  on  the  brink  of  death, 
sent  a  communication  to  the  Lutheran  Observer,  earnestly 
protesting  against  the  proposed  change  in  the  doctrinal 
basis : 

Hands  have  already  been  laid  on  the  constitution,  and 
that  on  a  very  important  point,  namely  the  doctrinal  basis. 
I  cannot  even  imagine  a  good  reason  for  this  change. 
We  had  prospered  before  the  change  was  made,  and 
should  have  been  content  to  let,  at  least  "  well  enough  " 
(I  should  say,  very  good)  "  alone."  The  old  wording 
of  the  basis  was  simple  and  perfectly  intelligible,  and  if 
misconstrued  or  perverted,  it  were  done  wilfully,  just  as 


1865.]  AX   ALARMING   INNOVATION.  135 

the  modified  language  in  the  change  may,  with  equal 
ingenuity,  be  misconstrued  and  perverted.  If  the  change 
was  made  to  conciHate  symboHsts,  then  it  was  worse  than 
vain,  for  it  only  gave  them  a  partial  triumph,  while  it 
did  not  draw  them  a  thousandth  part  of  an  ell  nearer  to 
us.  Who  does  not  know  that  if  we  wish  to  satisfy  them, 
we  must  "go  the  whole  figure,"  i.  e.,  adopt  the  entire 
body  of  symbolic  books  without  exception  or  reservation? 
In  other  words,  they  imperiously  demand  of  us,  to  go 
over  to  them,  and  not  expect  them  to  move  one  jot  or 
tittle  in  returning  to  us.  And  should  we  yield,  then 
adieu  to  the  peace,  unity  and  prosperity  of  evangelic 
Lutheranism  in  our  country,  for  Ichabod  will  be  written 
on  her  walls.  A  still  greater  objection  to  the  change  in 
the  basis,  is  the  fact,  that  it  was  a  change  in  the  constitu- 
tion. Organic  law,  which  usually  comprehends  only 
fundamental  principles,  should  be  rarely  touched  and 
always  with  a  sparing  and  cautious  hand.     This  is  a  well 

established   maxim Would   to   God,   the   district 

Synods  might  be  led  to  regard  it  as  their  duty  to  recon- 
sider this  subject,  and  vote  down  this  contemplated 
alarming  innovation,  this  unnecessary  violation  of  the 
deliberate  and  well-considered  work  of  their  cautious  and 
prayerful  fathers.  (See  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  Sep- 
tember 7,  1865.) 

The  proposed  amendment  of  its  doctrinal  basis  was 
formally  rejected  by  four  Synods, — Hartwick,  Melanch- 
thon,  Franckean,  and  Central  Synod  of  Pennsylvania. 
"  We  are  asked,"  said  the  President  of  the  Franckean 
Synod,  "  to  amend  the  Constitution  by  inserting  in  it  an 
unqualified  recognition  or  endorsement  of  the  entire 
Augsburg  Confession,  and  bind  it  as  a  creed  upon  our 
Synods  and  upon  our  consciences.  Are  we  prepared  to 
do  this?  to  do  violence  to  our  honest  convictions,  and 
become  the  reproach  of  Protestant  Christendom?  I 
trust  not."  And  the  leader  of  the  opposition  in  the 
Hartwick  Synod  openly  denounced  the  Augsburg  Con- 


136  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Ckav.XIV. 

fession  as  being  fundamentally  wrong  and  teaching  the 
grave  errors  commonly  attributed  to  it  by  its  enemies! 
But,  when  the  constitutional  amendment  of  the  General 
Synod  had  been  adopted  by  a  majority  of  eighteen 
Synods,  the  four  dissenting  ones  who  had  thus  openly 
and  defiantly  rejected  the  "  doctrinal  basis  "  in  its  new 
form,  continued  in  undisturbed  connection  with  the  Gen- 
eral Synod.  The  very  same  writer  who  had  so  cheerfully 
welcomed  the  amendment  in  the  Lutheran  Observer, — 
"  Now  we  know  where  we  stand,  we  are  true  Lutherans, 
we  all  stand  on  the  Augsburg  Confession  " — comforts 
those  dissenters  with  the  assurance  that  they  are  laboring 
under  a  misapprehension  if  they  protest  against  an 
unqualified  recognition  or  endorsement  of  the  entire 
Augsburg  Confession.  "  There  is  no  such  thing  as  an 
unqualified  subscription !  It  must  be  moderate  and 
liberal, — there  is  no  greater  madness  than  that  of  laying 
down  a  subscription  which  brands  as  traitors  to  Lutheran- 
ism  four-fifths  of  the  most  evangelical  and  devoted  por- 
tion of  the  native  Lutherans  of  the  land."  (Lutheran 
Observer,  September  8,  November  17,  1865.) 

To  understand  the  real  inwardness  of  the  General 
Synod's  action  at  York  we  must  remember,  that  between 
the  radical  American  Lutherans  and  the  Conservatives 
there  was,  in  the  General  Synod,  a  large  middle  party 
whose  leaders  Dr.  Krauth  characterized,  in  the  following 
scathing  language : 

There  are  always  moral  weaklings  who  deem  them- 
selves miracles  of  gentleness,  prudence  and  moderation, 
snaky  doves,  or  dove-like  serpents,  refusing  to  be  reduced 
to  a  class.  These  amiable  inanities  play  at  neutrality 
and  conservatism,  carefully  doing  justice  to  Ormuzd,  and 
not  forgetting  the  redeeming  features  of  Ahriman.  They 
think  that  there  are  no  real  differences  in  the  world,  and 
that  from  the  "unfortunate  misunderstanding"  which 
threw  Lucifer  out  of  heaven,  down  to  the  late  **  unhappy 


i865.]  AN  UNHAPPY  MEDIUM.  •  137 

misconception  "  between  Brown  and  Robinson,  there  is 
nothing  which  could  not  have  been  healed  by  a  cataplasm 
of  soft  words  and  soft  soap,  or  an  ointment  of  love  and 
lard.  Whatever  is  "  Tutissimus  "  they  assume  to  be  eo 
ipso,  "  in  mediis."  Whatever  is  the  best  policy  they 
assume  to  be  honesty.  They  now  go  with  the  one  side, 
now  with  the  other,  but  take  a  path  exactly  midway 
between  them,  assuming  that  wherever  the  extremes  of 
opinion  are  due  North  and  South,  the  precise  line  of 
truth  is  exactly  due  East  or  West ;  and  that,  supposing 
what  claims  to  be  truth  to  be  one  yard  off  from  alleged 
error,  you  infallibly  keep  the  golden  mean  by  holding 
yourself  eighteen  inches  aloof  from  both.  The  indistinct 
classes  are  alike  in  this,  that,  as  their  position  is  ambigu- 
ous, they  become  make-weights  on  this  side  or  that  side, 
as  circumstances  may  determine.  Their  general  affinities 
and  mysterious  fate  ordinarily,  however,  bring  them  out 
with  the  wrong.  Finding  that  instead  of  winning  the 
confidence  of  extremes,  they  lose  the  little  of  it  they  have 
had,  they  grow  weary  of  being  wandering  stars,  and 
tumble  at  last  into  the  bosom  of  the  largest  orb  that 
attracts  them. 

It  was  chiefly  due  to  the  influence  of  this  middle  party 
that  the  crisis  in  the  General  Synod  was  delayed  so  long. 
Their  attitude  at  one  time  filled  the  Radicals  with  the 
hope  of  carrying  all  their  measures,  and  fastening  their 
"  Definite  Platform "  on  the  American  Lutheran 
Church,  as  her  final  recension  of  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion; while,  perhaps  a  few  weeks,  yea  a  few  hours  later, 
they  would  take  their  stand  with  the  "  Symbolists  "  and 
hold  out  the  prospect  of  hearty  support,  in  order  to  keep 
them  in  the  fold  of  the  General  Synod.  It  is  evident  how 
this  policy  of  agreeing  to  disagree,  of  reconciling  the 
irreconcilable,  so  characteristic  of  the  General  Synod  of 
those  days,  resulted  from  this  cause.  But  it  also  reveals 
how  little  real  value  is  to  be  attached  to  actions  and 
resolutions  passed  by  a  body  composed  of  such  elements. 


138  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chav.XW. 

Such  was  the  case  in  the  York  convention  from  which 
the  final  crisis  is  to  be  dated.  The  first  resolution  con- 
cerning the  Franckean  Synod,  making  their  adoption  of 
the  Augsburg  Confession  the  condition  of  their  admis- 
sion, was  reached  by  the  coalition  of  the  middle  party  with 
the  Conservatives.  The  action  of  the  following  day, 
reversing  this  resolution  and  admitting  the  Franckeans 
at  once,  was  a  victory  of  the  Radicals  who  had  succeeded 
in  drawing  a  majority  over  to  their  side.  When  the 
protest  and  withdrawal  of  the  Pennsylvania  delegation, 
following  this  action,  opened  the  eyes  of  the  convention 
to  the  seriousness  of  the  crisis  to  which  it  had  drifted, 
there  came  the  proposed  amendment  of  the  constitution, 
with  the  Passavant-Krauth  resolutions  attached  to  it, — 
an  attempt  to  satisfy  the  Conservatives  and  to  stop 
further  disintegration. 

Dr.  Krauth  himself,  in  the  end,  was  not  at  all  satisfied 
with  those  resolutions. 

The  Pennsylvania  Synod,  with  that  charity  which 
believeth  all  things,  regarded  the  subsequent  resolutions 
of  the  General  Synod  professedly  in  vindication  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  as  earnest,  and  the  token  of  a 
better  mind.  Taken  in  the  meaning  of  those  who  offered 
them,  they  would  have  been  such  a  token.  The  after 
events  showed  that  they  were  designed  by  the  majority, 
as  an  adroit  piece  of  thimble-rig.  Passed  in  their 
earliest  form  in  the  Pittsburgh  Synod  to  counteract  the 
Definite  Platform,  these  resolutions  were  so  modified  by 
the  General  Synod  as  to  be,  in  the  sense  it  put  into  them, 
the  Definite  Platform  itself  in  a  new  form.  Their  repre- 
sentative men  had  made  a  "  Recension  "of  the  Augsburg 
Confession  which  made  it  mean  everything  it  did  not 
mean ;  and  now  the  General  Synod,  moved  largely  by  the 
Lobby  influence  which  was  the  power  behind  the  throne, 
mightier  than  the  throne  itself,  made  a  recension  of  the 
Pittsburgh  resolutions,  which  commuted  them  into  the 


i864.]  EARLY  PLANS  FOR  A  SEMINARY.  1 39 

poison,  to  which  they  had  originally  been  the  antidote." 
(September  10,  1868.) 


ESTABLISHMENT  OF  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY  IN 
PHILADELPHIA. 

A  few  days  after  the  adjournment  of  the  York  Con- 
vention of  the  General  Synod,  the  Ministerium  of  Penn- 
sylvania, at  its  117th  meeting  in  Pottstown,  Pa.,  resolved 
(May  25th,  1864)  :  "  That  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  we 
now  determine  to  undertake  the  establishment  of  a  theo- 
logical Seminar^'."  The  Seminary  idea  was,  indeed,  not 
a  new  one  with  the  Mother  Synod.  For  nearly  a  cen- 
tury, ever  since  the  days  of  the  Patriarch  H.  M.  Muehlen- 
berg,  she  had  been  waiting,  wishing  and  working  for  its 
realization.  In  1846  Dr.  C.  R.  Demme,  the  distinguished 
pastor  of  St.  Michael's  and  Zion's  Congregation,  Phila- 
delphia, had  been  nominated  as  the  Synod's  Professor  of 
Theolog}'.  He  had  educated  several  young  men  for  the 
ministry,  and  had  made  a  fair  beginning  with  the  collec- 
tion of  a  theological  library.  On  the  German  side  of  the 
house  the  Mother  Synod  was  constantly  urged  by  men 
like  S.  K.  Brobst,  C.  F.  Welden*  and  others,  to  establish 
her  own  institution  on  her  own  territory,  either  in  Allen- 
town  or  Philadelphia,  because  the  supply  of  German 
pastors  from  the  Gettysburg  seminary  was  found  insuffi- 
cient. The  English  brethren  (like  G.  F.  Krotel,  J.  Kohler, 
C.  W.  Schaeffer,  and  others)  were  at  first  willing  to  hold 
on  to  Gettysburg,  in  the  hope  that  a  change  for  the  better 
might  in  the  end  be  effected  in  that  institution.  As  Dr. 
S.    S.    Schmucker    had    resigned    his    professorship,    in 

*As  President  of  Synod,  in  his  ofiBcial  report,  i860,  he  had  recom- 
mended to  the  Ministerium,  "That  immediate  steps  be  taken  to 
establish  a  Theological  School  in  some  suitable  place,  the  residence 
of  two  or  more  ministers,  who  are  competent  for  the  work,  and  who 
shall  have  charge  of  such  institution."    (Engl.  Min.,  1S60.    p.  12.) 


140  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

February,  1864,  an  opportunity  seemed  to  present  itself 
for  a  representative  of  positive  Lutheranism,  to  be 
elected  as  his  successor.  But  the  experiences  of  the  York 
Convention,  and  the  conviction  that  there  was  no  prospect 
for  the  election  of  a  satisfactory  professor  in  Dr.  S.  S. 
Schmucker's  place,*  made  them  more  and  more  favorable 
to  the  demands  of  the  Germans.  The  President  of  the 
Ministerium,  Dr.  C.  W.  Schaeffer,  in  his  official  report 
to  the  Synod  in  1864,  strongly  advised  immediate  and 
definite  action  in  this  important  matter.  "  Providence," 
he  said,  "  seems  to  be  forcing  upon  our  attention  the  duty 
of  making  more  ample  provision  for  the  education  of 
pastors  whose  talents,  whose  acquirements  and  general 
cultivation,  shall  qualify  them  to  occupy  our  pulpits  with 
credit  to  themselves,  to  the  welfare  of  the  Church  and  to 

the  glory  of  God The  necessity  for  definite  and 

liberal  action  is  now  upon  us.  If  Synod  should  longer 
delay  it  may  be  too  late.  Men  whose  loyalty  to  our 
Confession  is  doubtful,  may  gradually  get  possession  of 
our  churches,  until  the  churches  themselves  shall  be 
seduced  from  the  holy  faith  of  the  fathers,  which  it  is  so 
much  the  glory  of  this  Synod  to  uphold.  The  whole 
subject  is  commended  to  your  serious  attention  and  your 
prompt  action." 

Thereupon  the  Ministerium  unanimously  resolved  to 
establish  its  own  theological  Seminary,  and  in  a  special 
meeting,  at  Allentown,  July  26  and  27,  1864,  determined 
the  necessary  details  for  the  organization  of  the  new 
institution.  It  was  to  be  located  in  Philadelphia.  Its 
doctrinal  character  was  "  unreservedly  and  unchangeably 
based     on     all     the     Confessions     of     the     Evangelical 

*  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown  who  once,  in  his  treatise  "  The  New  Theology ' ' 
had  criticized  Dr.  Schmucker's  teachings,  and  had  led  the  opposition 
against  the  Definite  Platform  of  the  East  Pennsylvania  Synod,  (See 
Vol.  I,  p.  410,  p.  360.)  was  elected  as  a  sort  of  compromise  candidate, 
to  succeed  Dr.  S.  S.  Sc+imucker,  in  August  1864. 


i864.]  THE    FOUNDING    OF    THE    SEMINARY.  141 

Lutheran  Church."  Three  ordinary  professors  were 
elected,  Dr.  \V.  J.  Alann  for  the  German  department, 
Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth  for  the  Enghsh,  and  Dr.  C.  F.  Schaeffer, 
of  Gettysburg,  for  the  intermediate  department.  Drs. 
C.  W.  Schaeffer  and  G.  F.  Krotel  were  appointed  as 
extraordinarii.  A  provisional  Board  of  Directors  was 
elected.  Neighboring  Evangelical  Lutheran  Synods, 
approving  of  the  principles  which  were  to  govern  this 
institution,  were  cordially  invited  to  co-operate  'in  its 
endowment. 

The  establishment  of  a  Theological  Seminary  in  the 
City  of  Philadelphia  was  a  formidable  undertaking  for  a 
Synod  like  that  of  Pennsylvania,  whose  members  and 
congregations,  unfortunately,  had  not  yet  been  trained  to 
liberal  giving,  and  to  a  united  active  participation  in  the 
work  of  the  Church.  But  now  everything  seemed  possi- 
ble to  those  whose  love  for  the  confession  of  their  fathers 
had  been  rekindled,  and  who  had  been  roused  to  a  full 
appreciation  of  their  responsibility  for  the  future  of  our 
Lutheran  Zion.  Hand  in  hand  the  work  was  under- 
taken and  carried  on  by  the  German  and  English  portion 
of  the  Church.  Mr.  Charles  F.  Norton,  a  member  of 
St.  Mark's  English  congregation,  founded  the  first  Eng- 
lish professorship.  The  German  Mother-congregation 
in  Philadelphia  gave  the  ground  for  the  building  in 
Franklin  Square,  and  a  considerable  sum  of  money 
besides.  Synod  completed  its  endowment  of  the  Ger- 
man professorship  at  the  meeting  in  Easton,  1865,  when, 
in  a  few  minutes,  the  necessary  balance  was  subscribed 
by  pastors  and  delegates.  The  New  York  Ministerium, 
the  Burkhalter  family,  of  New  York,  and  St.  John's 
English  congregation  of  Philadelphia  followed  in  the 
line  of  endowing  additional  professorships.  The  small 
beginning  made  with  eleven  students,  in  an  uninviting 
room  of  the  back  building  of  No.  42  North  Ninth  Street 


142  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Cuap.XIV. 

soon  enlarged  and  grew  steadily.  The  building  No.  216 
Franklin  Street  was  occupied.  After  eight  years  it  had 
to  be  enlarged  to  make  room  for  sixty  students.  In  1889 
the  Seminary  was  moved  to  the  beautiful  grounds  in 
Mount  Airy,  where  nearly  one  hundred  students  can  be 
accommodated.  Surely  the  Lord's  blessing  has  been 
abundantly  bestowed  upon  this  work. 

On  October  4,  1864,  at  a  solemn  and  inspiring  service, 
in  St. 'John's  English  Lutheran  Church,  Philadelphia,  the 
first  faculty  was  formally  installed.  Dr.  Beale  M, 
Schmucker,  the  English  secretarj^  of  the  Ministerium  of 
Pennsylvania,  delivered  the  charge  to  the  professors : 

Standing  here,  in  this  city,  where,  more  than  a  cen- 
tury ago,  our  Synod  was  first  organized,  and  the  founda- 
tions of  our  Church's  prosperity  in  this  country  were 
laid;  near  to  old  St.  Michael's,  the  first  church  erected 
under  the  ministry  of  the  patriarch  Muehlenberg,  in 
which  the  first  session  of  our  Synod  was  held,  where  for 
more  than  a  hundred  years  the  Gospel  has  been  preached 
in  the  German  language;  within  the  walls  of  St.  John's, 
the  first  church  erected  within  our  bounds  for  the  preach- 
ing of  the  Gospel  in  the  English  language;  calling  up 
before  us  the  memories  of  the  long  line  of  holy,  learned, 
laborious  men  of  God,  who  in  this  city,  and  within  the 
membership  of  our  Synod,  have  lived,  labored  and  gone 
to  their  eternal  rest,  who,  in  their  lives,  prepared  many 
for  the  work  of  the  ministry,  who  felt  the  ever  growing 
necessity  for  a  Theological  Seminary,  and  ....  looked 
forward  in  hope  toward  the  day  of  its  establishment;  in 
unity  of  faith  with  the  true  Evangelical  Lutheran 
Church  of  all  lands  and  ages,  in  humble  dependence  on 
Almighty  God,  the  everlasting  Father,  upon  Jesus  Christ, 
the  great  Head  of  the  Church,  and  upon  the  Holy  Ghost, 
we  lay  the  foundations  of  this  Theological  Seminary. 
We  appoint  and  install  you  as  its  first  Professors.  We 
commit  to  you,  and  to  those  who  shall  succeed  you  in 
office,  the  realization  of  the  hopes  of  those  who  are  now 


i864.]  THE  FIRST  FACULTY  INSTALLED.  143 

no  more,  and  our  own.     The  Lord  have  you  in  His  holy 
keeping,  and  prosper  the  work  of  your  hands. 

Dr.  Krauth,  the  youngest  member  of  the  faculty,  at 
the  request  of  his  colleagues,  made  the  formal  reply  to 
the  charge,  defining  the  doctrinal  position  and  aim  of  the 
Seminary.  He  discussed  the  rule  of  faith,  which  is  the 
Word  of  God, — the  faith  of  the  rule,  which  faith  is  set 
forth  in  the  Confession,— the  right  of  private  judgment 
in  relation  to  the  rule  and  the  faith,  exercised  in  reaching 
the  meaning  of  the  rule,  and  embodying  and  protecting 
its  results  in  the  Confession, — and  theology  in  all  its 
forms  linked  with  the  rule  and  with  the  faith. 

We  stand,  he  said  in  his  opening  remarks,  upon  the 

everlasting  foundation— the  Word  of  God :  believing  that 

the  Canonical  Books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are 

in  their  original  tongues,  and  in  a  pure  text,  the  perfect 

and  only  rule  of  faith.     All  these  books  are  in  harmony, 

each  with  itself,  and  all  with  each  otfier,  and  yield  to  the 

honest  searcher,  under  the  ordinary  guidance  of  the  Holy 

Spirit,  a  clear  statement  of  doctrine,  and  produce  a  firm 

assurance  of   faith.     Not  any  word  of  man.  no  creed, 

commentary,  theological  system,  nor  decision  of  councils, 

no  doctrine  of  churches,  or  of  the  whole  Church,   no 

results  or  judgments  of  reason,  however  strong,  matured 

and  well  informed,  no  one  of  these,  and  not  all  of  these 

together,  but  God's  Word  alone  is  the  Rule  of  Faith.    No 

apocryphal  books,  but  the  canonical  books  alone,  are  the 

Rule  of  Faith.     No  translations,  as  such,  but  the  original 

Hebrew   and   Chaldee  of   the   Old   Testament,   and   the 

Greek  of  the  New,  are  the  letter  of  the  Rule  of  Faith. 

No  vitiation  of  the  designing,  nor  error  of  the  careless, 

but  the  incorrupt  text  as  it  came  from  the  hands  of  the 

men  of  God.  who  wrote  under  the  motions  of  the  Holy 

Spirit,  is  the  rule  of  faith.     To  this  rule  of   faith  we 

bring  our  minds;  by  this  rule  we  have  humbly  tried  to 

form  our  faith,  and  in  accordance  with  it.  God  helping  us, 

we  will  teach  others — teaching  them  the  evidences  of  its 


144  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [CnAV.XlY. 

inspiration,  the  true  mode  of  its  interpretation,  the  ground 
of  its  authority,  and  the  mode  of  setthng  its  text.  We 
desire  to  teach  the  student  of  theology  the  Bibhcal 
languages,  to  make  him  an  independent  investigator  of 
the  word  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  organ  through  which 
that  Spirit  reveals  His  mind.  We  consecrate  ourselves, 
therefore,  first  of  all,  as  the  greatest  of  all,  as  the  ground- 
work of  all,  as  the  end  of  all  else,  to  teaching  and  prepar- 
ing others  to  teach  God's  pure  Word,  its  faith  for  faith,  its 
life  for  life;  in  its  integrity,  in  its  marvellous  adaptation, 
in  its  divine,  its  justifying,  its  sanctifying,  and  glorifying 
power.  We  lay,  therefore,  as  that  without  which  all  else 
would  be  laid  in  vain,  the  foundation  of  the  Apostles  and 
Prophets — Jesus  Christ  Himself  being  the  chief  corner- 
stone. 

In  the  first  provisional  sketch  for  the  division  of 
departments  in  the  new  Seminary,  the  following  branches, 
were  assigned  to  Dr.  Krauth :  Systematic  Divinity, 
Encyclopedia  and  Methodology,  Hebrew,  Old  and  New 
Testament  Exegesis,  Church  History,  Ecclesiastical 
Polity.  But  only  the  first  two  and  the  last  one  were 
actually  undertaken  by  him.  One  of  his  brightest  pupils, 
the  first  alumnus  of  the  Philadelphia  Seminary  who 
became  President  of  the  General  Council,*  thus  describes 
his  method  of  instruction  in  the  Seminary :  It  was  "  to 
follow  some  German  author, — Luthardt  in  Dogmatics, 
Hagenbach  in  Encyclopedia,  Richter  in  Church  Polity, — 
as  a  general  guide,  and  then,  in  lectures,  to  develop, 
modify  or  apply,  according  to  the  needs  of  our  Church 
here  in  America.  Gradually  these  lectures  assumed  a 
fixed  written  form,  and  then  students  were  expected  tO' 
copy  them  and  recite  from  them."  Unfortunately  his  plan 
in  teaching  Dogmatics  was  entirely  too  diffuse  for  a  three 
years'  Seminary  course,  being  actually  spread  over  nine 

*The  Rev.  Th.  E.  Schmauk,  D.  D.    See  Indicator,  February  1883. 


1864-6-.]  TEACHER  AND  PUPILS.  I45 

years,   so  that   a  student   during  his  attendance   at  the 
Seminary,  would  only  get  one  third  of  the  whole  course. 

Dr.  Krauth  was  the  ideal  teacher  for  the  ideal  student. 
The  ordinary  and  subordinary  element  learned  little  in  his 
room.  He  expected  much  from  his  pupils.  The  very 
language  of  the  text  book  must  be  memorized  unless  the 
student  could  reproduce  the  thought  in  language  as  exact 
as  the  author's.  With  thought  and  language  fully  at 
command,  the  student  was  invited  to  bring  up  any  diffi- 
culty or  objection,  or  to  ask  for  an  illustration  or 
explanation.  In  these  social  talks,  the  Doctor  was  inspir- 
ing. He  did  not  jump  at  conclusions,  or  assume  ignor- 
ance in  the  learner's  mind,  but  patiently  waited  till  the 
latter  had  stated  the  objection  in  full,  and  even  repeated 
it  to  assure  himself  that  he  had  caught  the  meaning  of  a 
mind  laboring  in  doubt  and  confusion,  and  then,  by  his- 
invincible  power  of  logic,  he  penetrated  to  the  centre  of 
the  point  at  issue,  and  by  his  wonderful  gift  of  language, 
he  made  the  subtle  and  obscure  distinctions  so  clear  that 
the  student's  heart  would  throb  with  enthusiasm  and 
excitement.  Questions  would  fly  from  all  parts  of  the 
class,  but  no  one  could  "  corner  "  the  Doctor.  His  prin- 
ciple in  argumentation  was  always  to  start  from  a  point 
on  which  his  opponent  agreed  with  him,  and  to  argue  to 
that  on  which  they  disagreed. 

In  recitation,  the  Doctor  prided  himself  on  his  ability 
to  restrain  his  enthusiasm,  and  to  put  the  student's 
knowledge  to  a  fair  but  critical  test  by  questioning.  He 
sat  there  with  a  countenance  immoveable  as  adamant, 
even  while  the  student  was  making  the  most  ridiculous 
statements,  and  many  a  one  has  sat  down  after  the  polite 
"  That  will  do,"  with  the  feeling  that  he  had  made  a 
splendid  recitation,  while  the  Doctor  put  down  a  notation 
not  much  above  zero. 

Dr  Krauth  loved  his  pupils.  He  defended  them, 
thought  well  of  them,  and  put  the  most  charitable  con- 
struction on  all  their  words  and  actions.  He  was  par- 
ticularly interested  in  the  Indicator,  a  monthly,  published 

10 


146  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

by  the  Seminary  students  for  a  number  of  years.  The 
first  number  of  the  Indicator  intimates  that  "  a  wise  old 
head,  keen  in  foresight  and  weighty  in  experience,"  had 
something  to  do  with  its  estabhshment.  To  his  residence 
two  students  repaired,  and  there,  in  the  cool  of  the  sum- 
mer evening,  the  plans  for  the  Indicator  were  discussed 
and  matured.  It  was  his  eye  that  scanned  the  doubtful 
articles,  and  more  than  once  has  some  student  rushed  out 
to  that  house  in  West  Philadelphia,  to  obtain  from  the 
final  referee  his  decision  on  some  disputed  point. 

The  Seminary  library  was  very  near  Dr.  Krauth's 
heart.  Through  his  efforts  many  a  costly  volume  was 
placed  on  its  shelves.  It  was  he  who  induced  Mr. 
Dobler  in  Baltimore  to  give  us  the  Dobler  Funds ;  it  was 
he  who  was  entrusted  with  the  duty  of  selecting  and 
purchasing  books.  He  was  always  ready  to  give  the 
librarians  the  benefit  of  his  discriminating  judgment  and 
great  learning.  Once,  while  in  the  library,  and  speaking 
of  it,  he  said:  If  I  had  twenty  thousand  dollars  to  give 
to  the  Seminary,  I  would  not  found  a  professorship,  but 
would  put  them  into  the  library.* 

During  the  months  following  the  establishment  of 
the  Seminary,  Dr.  Krauth  was  involved  in  a  protracted 
controversy  with  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown,  of  Gettysburg,  con- 
cerning the  doctrinal  position,  respectively,  of  the  two 
institutions.  Dr.  Krauth  wrote  his  articles  in  this  sharp 
discussion  with  a  sore  heart,  but  from  no  enmity  to  the 
theological  school  at  Gettysburg,  which  had  been  his  own 
Alma  Mater.  He  declared  that  the  Seminary  at  Phila- 
delphia ''originated  in  no  personal  hostility  to  it ;  it  is  not 
in  opposition  to  it,  except  so  far  as  the  principle  of  an 
assured  faith,  in  its  own  nature,  stands  firmly  over 
against  the  vacillation  of  the  private  opinion,  which  shifts 
with  each  change  of  a  professorial  chair,  or  with  the 
eras  of  the  progress  or  retrocession  of  its  incumbent. 

*Th.  E.  Schmauk,  Indicator,  February,  1883. 


1865.]  GETTYSBURG  AND   PHILADELPHIA.  147 

.  .  .  We  have  loved  our  Seminary  at  Gettysburg  as 
few  can  love  it.  In  the  light  of  memories  of  the  past, 
and  in  the  bonds  which  hold  our  hearts  to  those  who 
now  toil  in  it,  and  to  early  and  dear  friends  who  cherish 
it,  we  love  it  still.  To  turn  from  it  has  involved  one  of 
the  severest  conflicts  of  our  life,  between  our  convictions 
and  our  affections,  and  we  still  offer  our  fervent  prayers 
that  it  may  come  to  rest  in  every  part  on  the  sure  and 
eternal  foundation  of  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints,  and  thus  be  established,  for  a  blessing  to  the 
Church  and  the  world,  to  the  end  of  time."  In  a  similar 
strain  he  writes  to  his  daughter,  (June  30,  1865.)   .   .  . 

"You  can  hardly  appreciate  how  much  it  has  cost  me  to 
be  faithful  to  my  convictions ;  how  deep  they  must  be  to 
lead  me  to  take  any  position  which  would  even  indirectly 
give  disquietude  to  my  father,  whom  I  love  and  revere 
with  my  whole  heart.  Yet,  I  feel  that  it  is  the  principles 
in  which  he  reared  me  which  I  am  faithfully  carrying  out. 
I  think  that  when  I  have  answered  Dr.  Brown  your 
solicitude  for  the  cause  I  represent  will  be  relieved.  I  am 
on  the  side  of  the  truth.  Your  grandfather  Krauth  has 
always  thought  and  declared  that  nothing  would  be  so 
happy  a  thing  for  the  Church,  as  the  ability  to  receive 
unreservedly  the  faith  set  forth  in  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession. He  has  always  disapproved  of  the  latitudinarian 
way  in  which  the  doctrinal  tests  have  been  interpreted. 
Ask  him,  whether,  believing  as  I  do  in  my  inmost  heart, 
that  the  whole  faith  of  our  Church  is  taught  in  God's 
W^ord.  I  can  in  conscience  take  any  other  position  toward 
the  men  and  the  principles  which  undermine  what  I  believe 
is  divine?  While  I  have  a  part  to  fight  in  this  great 
battle  of  truth  I  am  willing  to  endure  hardness  as  a 
soldier  of  Jesus  Christ.  Your  picture  of  quiet  and  rest 
is  very  charming, — but  there  are  but  twelve  hours  in 
the  day." 

His  conviction  of  the  imperative  necessity  of  the  new 
theological  seminary,  is  forcibly  set  forth  in  an  article 


148  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.[Cbav.XW. 

in  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  August  ii,  1864,  from 
which  we  quote  the  following  main  points : 

It  is  needed  for  the  sake  of  pure  doctrine.  There  is 
no  Theological  Seminary  in  the  United  States,  in  which 
are  fully  taught,  in  the  English  language,  the  doctrines 
of  the  Reformation,  as  our  Church  then  held,  and  now 
holds  and  confesses  them.  The  number,  ever  growing, 
of  Lutheran  Students  of  Divinity,  who  speak  the  English 
alone,  and  the  proportion  of  our  churches,  constantly 
increasing,  which  require  English  preaching  exclusively, 
makes  this  reason  so  cogent,  that,  if  it  stood  alone,  it 
ought  to  decide  the  question.  Let  those  who  say  a  new 
Seminary  is  not  needed  fairly  meet  this  fact — that  we 
might  more  safely  send  our  sons  to  Princeton  or  Ando- 
ver  to  imbue  them  with  just  ideas  of  Lutheran  doctrine, 
and  with  love  for  it,  than  we  can  send  them  to  any  Insti- 
tution of  our  Church  within  our  reach,  in  which  doctrinal 
theology  is  taught  in  English.  If  the  Lutheran  Church  is 
not  Scriptural  in  her  distinctive  faith — that  very  faith, 
in  virtue  of  which  she  exists  as  a  separate  organization 
with  a  distinct  name,  she  ought  not  to  live,  ought  not 
to  bear  the  name,  ought  not  to  have  Theological  Semin- 
aries at  all;  but  if  she  be  Scriptural,  as  she  is  in  very 
deed,  in  her  whole  faith,  then  is  it  our  sacred  duty  to  see 
that  ample  arrangements  be  made  for  perpetuating,  in 
every  tongue  in  which  her  ministers  set  forth  Christ 
crucified,  that  whole  faith  in  the  glorious  internal  har- 
mony of  its  inseparable  points.  Have  we  Seminaries 
enough  ?  We  reply :  We  have  a  great  many,  too  many, 
of  the  wrong  kind;  but  we  have  not  one  to  which  we 
can  look,  to  which  a  man  who  believes  in  the  Scriptural 
character  and  fundamental  importance  of  all  the  doc- 
trines of  our  Church  can,  without  doubt  or  fear,  recom- 
mend the  students  who  must  receive  instruction  in 
English  alone.  There  is  no  Theological  School  to  which 
we  can  send  our  sons,  in  which  the  doctrines  and  con- 
fessions of  our  Church  are  set  forth  to  the  English 
student  as  throughout  consonant  with  the  Divine  Word. 


i864.]  THE  SEMINARY  NECESSARY.  149 

The  new  Theological  Seminary,  based  upon  the  Word 
of  God  as  the  sole  rule  of  faith,  and  upon  the  Creed 
of  the  Church  as  a  pure  confession  of  that  faith,  and 
making  arrangements  for  instruction  in  every  depart- 
ment of  Theology  in  the  English  language,  will  meet 
this  great  and  crying  want.  When  fully  organized,  it 
will  have  four  or  five  professors  heartily  devoted  to  the 
doctrines  of  our  Church — giving,  some  of  them  the 
whole,  others  a  part  of  their  time  and  labor,  to  teaching 
in  the  English  language  the  various  parts  of  Theology. 

We  need  it  for  the  sake  of  internal  homogeneousness 
among  the  men  who  are  to  be  trained  for  our  minisfry. 
It  will  meet  one  grand  want,  in  training  in  the  same  doc- 
trine, love  and  life,  all  our  students.  It  is  most  unnatural 
and  dangerous  that  in  the  same  communion,  and  under 
the  same  roof,  one  set  of  students  should  be  taught  to 
regard  as  Romish  abominations  and  dangerous  errors 
what  others  are  taught  to  consider  as  the  very  truth  of 
God.  It  is  hazarding  the  wreck  of  the  faith  of  our  young 
men  to  show  them,  at  the  time  of  their  highest  im- 
pressibleness,  their  own  teachers,  to  whom  they  ought 
to  look  up  reverently,  at  war  in  regard  to  the  faith,  setting 
forth  conflicting  doctrines,  leading  different  factions, 
or  controlled  by  them.  It  makes  them  regard  the  faith 
of  the  Church  as  a  thing  that  may  be  doubted;  doctrines 
seem  to  them  as  mere  matters  of  opinion  and  theses  of 
controversy;  they  commit  themselves  to  extreme  posi- 
tions in  debate ;  error  becomes  more  inveterate,  and  the 
truth  itself  tends  to  become  exaggerated  on  the  particular 
side  on  which  it  is  assailed ;  laxity  runs  into  rationalism 
and  skepticism — orthodoxy  into  harshness  and  bigotry.  A 
Seminary  in  which  conflicting  systems  are  taught  nurses 
contempt  for  authority,  rancor  between  students,  and 
misunderstanding  among  professors.  It  will  help  in 
the  bad  work  of  unsettling  the  Church,  and  will  spread 
its  griefs  and  heart-burnings  far  and  wide. 

We  need  it  for  the  sake  of  the  true  co-ordinating  and 
harmonious  working  of  the  two  languages — English  and 
German.     It  is  one  great  want  of  our  Church  that  the 


ISO 


CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chaf.XIY. 


two  tongues  should  work  in  sisterly  harmony.  But 
while  the  language  is  the  badge  of  diversity  in  doctrine, 
usage  and  spirit,  it  will  be  clung  to  most  tenaciously. 
The  attachment  of  our  German  brethren  to  their  language 
is  not  necessarily  that  blind,  narrow  thing  which  some 
imagine,  and  others  pretend  to  imagine,  it  is.  Let  the 
German  and  English  elements  of  ,our  Church  throb 
heart  to  heart  in  faith  and  life,  and  the  diverse  tongues 
will  no  longer  make  the  old  practical  difficulty.  In  a 
Seminary  where  individual  opinions  are  set  forth  in  one 
tongue,  and  the  faith  of  the  Church  in  another,  the  two 
sets  of  students  will  be  in  danger  of  transferring  their 
dislike  of  principles  to  the  language,  and  from  the  lan- 
guage to  the  persons  of  those  who  hold  them.  Hand  in 
hand  should  move  the  two  noble  languages  which  our 
Church  in  this  part  of  the  world  has  given  to  her  for  her 
sublime  mission.  She  has  what  Alexander  wept  for :  she 
conquered  the  world  which  speaks  German — and  now, 
with  the  soldiers  who  wrought  that  conquest,  she  can  go 
forth  to  subdue  to  Christ  the  new  world,  which  speaks 
a  tongue  our  fathers  knew  not.  Let  us  have  a  Seminary 
in  which  the  one  pure  faith  shall  be  the  hallowed  bond 
of  both  languages.  This,  and  this  only  is  a  solvent 
mighty  enough  for  the  difficulties  connected  with 
the  nationalities  and  languages  of  our  Church  in  this 
Western  World.  You  sanctify,  you  glorify  the  prejudice 
of  tongue  and  nation  when  you  make  them  badges  of 
faith  and  safeguards  to  it.  The  Lutheran,  in  that  case, 
will  cling  to  his  language  because  he  loves  his  faith ;  but 
bring  to  his  earnest  heart  the  conviction,  in  any  case, 
that  for  that  very  faith's  sake  all  thought  of  nationality 
and  language  must  be  made  secondary,  and  he  will  make 
it  secondary.  The  spirit  of  the  new  Seminary,  the  spirit 
to  which  it  owes  its  life,  is  that  neither  English  nor 
German  shall  be  anything  for  itself,  but  shall  be  every- 
thing for  Christ. 

This  homogeneousness  of  doctrinal  influence  and  co- 
ordination of  languages  will  tend  to  produce  unity  of 
spirit  in  our  young  ministry,  and,  through  them,  in  the 


1864-]  WORKING  TOGETHER  IN  LOVE.  151 

whole  Church.  Trained  to  love  the  same  faith,  taught  to 
do  justice,  each  to  the  language  of  the  other,  as  mainly 
valuable,  because  in  it  is  to  be  set  forth,  maintained  and 
applied,  the  sacred  faith  for  which  our  Confessors  faced 
kings,  and  our  martyrs  went  exultingly  to  the  death,  our 
young  men  will  feel  that  they  have  one  holy  work  to 
do — that  the  purest  affection  for  each  other  should  ani- 
mate them,  and  that  they  should  co-work  with  every 
power  which  God  has  given  them.  Nothing  so  binds  men 
as  a  common  faith.  Never  do  men  build  heartily  together 
until  they  are  agreed  as  to  what  is  to  be  built,  and  are 
persuaded  in  their  inmost  hearts  that  their  work  is,  in  all 
its  parts,  of  God.  The  difference  of  tongues  among  the 
workers  stopped  the  building  of  the  Tower  of  Babel, 
but  it  did  not  prevent  the  rearing  of  the  Temple.  The 
very  source  from  which  our  sunderings  have  often  come, 
shall  henceforth  tend  to  promote  our  unity.  In  the 
properly  directed  heart  of  young  Christians  of  different 
nationalities,  there  is  a  strong  mutual  interest  and  sym- 
pathy. To  the  right-minded,  planning  and  applying 
American  there  is  something  peculiarly  interesting  in 
the  character,  tone  of  thought  and  feeling — in  the  very 
diversities  of  the  German,  as  there  is  on  the  part  of 
the  warm-hearted,  trusting  and  reflecting  German  a 
peculiar  charm  in  the  genuine  brother  in  the  faith,  born 
in  another  land,  and  shaped  in  a  different  world  of  influ- 
ence. Bring  our  young  men  together,  to  nurture  them 
in  one  fixed  faith,  to  breathe  into  them  one  intense  love, 
to  accustom  them  to  one  harmonious  usage,  to  keep  them 
working  together  practically,  for  a  time,  in  one  field ; 
then  send  them  forth,  and  the  bond  which  unites  them 
can  never  be  broken.  The  ties  which  hold  them  together 
are  enduring  as  life.  Their  Theological  training  has  been 
the  time  of  their  entrance  into  the  inner  court  of  com- 
munion of  saints.  Christ,  in  his  inseparable  connexion 
WMth  His  own  incorrupt  doctrine  and  pure  sacraments,  will 
be  their  centre,  and  they  will  make  Him,  and  His  teach- 
ings, and  His  means  of  grace,  the  centre  of  all  the 
churches  in  which  they  labor — the  centre  of  an  assured 


152  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XIV. 

and  abiding-  faith.     Then  may  we  hope  for  a  true  unity, 
which  shall  beget  a  substantial  and  healthy  uniformity. 

The  action  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod,  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  Philadelphia  Seminary,  called  forth  the 
severe  criticism  and  fierce  condemnation  of  the  leaders 
of  the  General  Synod.  From  the  time  that  it  became 
known,  we  notice  that  the  withdrawal  of  the  Pennsyl- 
vania delegation  in  York  is  being  considered  in  a  differ- 
ent and  more  serious  light.  Now  the  question  is 
raised :  "Is  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  still  a  component 
part  of  the  General  Synod?"  And  the  assertion  is  made 
that  the  withdrawal  of  her  delegates  was  the  wjthdrawal 
of  the  Synod  itself  from  the  General  Synod.  "The 
Seminary  and  its  fostering  Synod  will,  of  course,  dissolve 
their  connection  with  the  General  Synod.  .  .  .  This 
Seminary  is  now  de  facto  out  of  the  General  Synod,  and 
in  doctrine  and  spirit  antagonistic  to  it.  .  .  .  The  whole 
movement  is  virtually  one  of  secession.  It  is  revolu- 
tionary. ...  It  is  the  old  argument  of  Papal  domination 
repeated  in  the  nineteenth  century ;  private  opinion  is 
nothing,  individual  conscience  is  nothing,  you  must  be- 
lieve in  the  infallible  Church.  ...  It  is  a  formal  protest 
against  the  doctrinal  basis  and  polity  of  the  General 
Synod.  It  is  a  call  for  separation.  ...  In  this  advanced 
age  of  Christian  liberality  and  progress  we  have  no  need 
of  ministers  fashioned  after  the  effete  theological  system 
and  extreme  symbolism  of  this  abnormal  Seminary.  We 
want  living  men  now,  and  not  antediluvian  petrifactions 
or  theological  automatons." 

A  few  weeks  after  the  installation  of  the  professors  in 
Philadelphia,  "The  Coming  Theological  Conflict"  was 
treated  in  an  able  editorial  of  the  Lutheran  Observer 
(October  21,  1864),  evidently  from  the  pen  of  Dr.  S. 
S.  Schmucker.  The  writer  takes  a  calm  and  compre- 
hensive view  of  the  crisis  in  the  Church,  comparing  the 


1864.1  DR.  S.  S.  SCHMUCKER  ALARMED.  153 

time  to  that  of  the  organization  of  the  General  Synod, 
with  its  reaction  of  the  positive  elements  against prevaihng 
rationalizing  tendencies.  He  asks :  "Will  the  aggressive 
High  Church  movement  be  resisted  hereafter,  or  shall 
the  whole  Church  be  yielded  to  its  leavening  influence?" 
He  is  not  without  anxiety  concerning  the  final  outcome, 
and  seriously  considers  the  possibility  of  the  ultimate 
triumph  of  the  minority.  "It  would  not  be  the  first 
instance  in  the  history  of  the  world,  of  the  few  winning 
the  prize  from  the  many,  by  wise  policy  and  burning 
energy.  .  .  .  The  principal  agencies  by  which  the  ultra- 
confessional  men  are  now  operating  on  the  Church  are 
the  new  Seminary  at  Philadelphia,  the  Lutheran  and 
Missionary,  and  the  publication  of  Catechisms,  Litur- 
gies and  Hymn  Books  under  the  sanction  of  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Synod.  .  .  .  Should  the  smaller  party  surpass  the 
larger  in  zeal,  sagacity  and  vigor,  should  the  majority 
remain  supine,  allowing  their  institutions  and  their 
journal  to  languish,  and  their  writers  to  be  negligent  of 
the  Liturgy,  the  Catechism  and  the  Hymn  Book,  it 
requires  no  prophetic  vision  to  forsee  the  result." 

When  the  representatives  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod 
appeared  at  the  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the 
Gettysburg  Seminary  they  were  refused  admission, 
because,  "in  the  opinion  of  this  Board  the  Pennsylvania 
Synod  by  its  action  at  York,  Pottstown  and  Easton  had 
placed  itself  outside  the  pale  of  the  General  Synod."  And 
yet,  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  had  not  said  a  word  about 
withdrawing  from  the  General  Synod.  She  adopted  the 
amendments  to  the  Constitution  of  the  General  Synod, 
proposed  by  the  York  Convention,  and  elected  a  full  dele- 
gation to  represent  her  at  the  next  convention  in  Fort 
Wayne,  1866.  She  seemed  entirely  undisturbed  and 
unconcerned,  even  in  the  face  of  the  most  violent  articles 
in  the  Lutheran  Observer,  which  predicted  that  the  Penn- 
sylvania delegation  would  "have  to  travel  to  Fort  Wayne 


154  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chaf.XIV. 

and  back  at  their  own  expense.  Their  credentials  will 
probably  be  laid  upon  the  table,  until  after  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  Synod,  and  then  be  referred  to  a  Committee 
who  will  report  at  the  close  of  the  Convention,  to  the 
effect,  that,  when  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  sends  a  delega- 
tion upon  the  same  terms  as  other  Synods,  they  may 
be  received,  and  not  before."  {Lutheran  Observer,  June 
30,  1865.) 

Possibly  the  Synod  of  Pennsylvania  did  not,  at  the 
time,  realize  the  full  significance  and  far-reaching  influ- 
ence of  her  own  action  in  establishing  the  Philadelphia 
Seminary.  When  Dr.  Chas.  Philip  Krauth,  of  Gettys- 
burg, heard  of  the  step  taken  by  the  Mother  Synod  he 
said  with  a  heavy  heart :  *'Now  a  division  of  the  Church 
cannot  be  avoided."  History  proved  the  correctness  of 
his  judgment.  The  hopes  of  continued  harmonious  co- 
operation in  and  with  the  General  Synod,  expressed  by 
the  Pennsylvania  Synod,  after  the  establishment  of  her 
own  Seminary,  were  pleasant  illusions.  However  well 
meant,  charitable  and  sincere  her  declarations  in  this 
respect  had  been,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  clearer 
judgment  and  more  consistent  logic  was  on  the  side  of 
the  radical  wing  of  the  General  Synod.  They  showed  a 
thorough  appreciation  of  the  real  situation  with  which 
they  were  now  confronted.  The  "Symbolists"  had  gained 
possession  of  two  powerful  instrumentalities,  which  had 
hitherto  been  exclusively  in  the  hands  of  the  American 
Lutherans,  they  had  the  Press  in  the  Lutheran  and  Mis- 
sionary, with  Charles  Porterfield  Krauth,  as  editor-in-chief ; 
and  they  had  their  Theological  Seminary  in  Philadelphia. 
By  means  of  these  two  agencies  the  forces  of  the  Conserv- 
atives were,  at  last,  well  organized,  and  would  soon  make 
their  influence  felt  in  training  a  different  ministry,  and 
creating  a  different  spirit  throughout  the  laity  of  the 
Church.  There  were  now  two  armies,  fully  equipped 
and  encamped  against  each  other.    "Practically,"  said  one 


1864-66.]         THE  -CASE"  OF  THE  OLD  SYNOD.  155 

of  the  Radicals,  "we  are  two  denominations,  disguise  it 
as  we  may.  ...  It  is  time  that  all  hollow  truces  should 
he  abandoned."  It  was  better  that  the  illusion  of  still 
being  united  in  one  body  should  come  to  an  end.  The 
Radicals  had  the  power  to  bring  this  result  about.  Theirs 
was  the  President  in  the  chair  of  the  next  convention. 
Let  him  rule  out  the  Pennsylvania  delegation  and  they 
would  never  return !  Such  was  the  programme.  It  was 
carefully  pre-concerted,  and  was  carried  through 
unflinchingly. 

In  February,  1866,  Dr.  S.  Sprecher,  the  President 
of  the  General  Synod,  expressed  himself,  as  follows, 
on  the  "case"  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod : 

In  regard  to  the  relations  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod 
to  the  General  Synod  I  have  some  difficulty.  If  the  with- 
drawal of  her  delegates  could  be  disconnected  from  the 
past  history  of  the  General  Synod  there  would  be  no 
difficulty.  But  after  leaving  the  General  Synod  and  not 
sending  delegates  for  many  years,  the  General  Synod 
...  at  Winchester  allowed  her  delegates  to  take  their 
seats  without  any  application  on  her  part  to  be  received 
into  the  General  Synod,  and  while  other  Synods  whose 
delegates  appeared  at  Winchester  had  to  make  regular 
application  before  their  delegates  could  take  their  seats, 
those  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  were  received  without 
such  application,  and  treated  as  if  their  Synod  had  never 
left  the  General  Synod,  though  she  had  year  after  year, 
for  many  years,  done  nothing  but  abuse  the  General 
Synod,  and  declare  that  she  had  nothing  to  do  with  it. 
Besides,  her  delegates,  at  Winchester,  were  permitted 
to  take  their  seats  at  the  same  time  that  they  explicitly 
stated  the  action  of  their  Synod  requiring  them  instantly 
to  withdraw  and  report  to  her,  in  case  the  General  Synod 
violated  her  Constitution,  etc.  Now,  from  this  it  would 
almost  seem  as  if  it  was  understood  that  this  withdrawal 
of  her  delegates  temporarily,  for  the  purpose  of  punish- 
ing  the   General    Synod,   was   only   a   special    privilege 


156       CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

granted  her,  and  did  not  amount  to  a  withdrawal  of  the 
Synod  herself.  Unfortunately  the  arguments  in  favor  of 
the  amendment  of  the  Constitution,  the  ratio  of  repre- 
sentation especially,  seemed  all  to  proceed  on  the  sup- 
position that  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  was  in  the  General 
Synod.  I  think,  however,  that  I,  as  President  of  the 
General  Synod,  can  know  officially  only  that  the  dele- 
gates of  that  Synod  withdrew,  and  that  I,  as  President, 
cannot,  in  the  organizing  of  the  General  Synod,  know 
any  action  of  this  Synod  in  the  interval,  as  it  cannot  be 
officially  known  until  it  is  reported  to  the  General  Synod, 
and  no  such  report  can  be  made  until  after  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  General  Synod.  In  other  words,  that  I,  as 
President  of  the  General  Synod,  cannot  know  whether 
the  Pennsylvania  Synod  may  not  have  been  grieved  as 
much  in  conscience  as  her  delegates  were,  and  conse- 
quently have  withdrawn;  or  whether,  if  she  sanctioned 
the  act  of  her  delegates  only  as  the  manifestation  of  dis- 
approbation of  her  servant,  the  General  Synod,  and  has 
sent  another  set  of  delegates,  whether  her  action  was 
such  as  the  General  Synod  can  tolerate,  or  was  accom- 
panied by  such  conditions  as  she  must  reject ;  and  conse- 
quently that  I  must  regard  her  as  out  of  the  General 
Synod  until  it  is  organized.  My  present  feeling  is  that  I 
have  a  right  to  refuse  to  receive  the  certificates  of  their 
delegates.* 

Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker,  of  Gettysburg,  on  the  journey  to 
Fort  Wayne,  told  his  son,  Beale  M.  Schmucker,  one  of 
the  Pennsylvania  delegates,  "that  an  extended  corre- 
spondence between  prominent  men  of  the  General  Synod, 
many  of  them  delegates  to  the  approaching  meeting,  had 
been  held,  that  they  had  carefully  considered  the  situa- 
tion, and  that  they  had  resolved  that  the  Ministerium  of 
Pennsylvania  should  no  longer  be  connected  with  the 
General  Synod.  He  calmly  reviewed  the  position  on 
both  sides,  and  gave  the  reasons  why  it  was  better  for 

*  Letter  to  Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker,  February  12,  1866. 


i866.]  SYNODICAL  SERMON,  FORT  WAYNE.  157 

peace  and  unity  that  this  course  should  be  taken,  and 
being  assured  of  the  support  of  a  majority  of  votes,  the 
action  was  decided  on."* 

CONVENTION  AT  FORT  WAYNE,    1 866. 

The  twenty-second  convention  of  the  General  Synod 
was  opened  at  Fort  Wayne,  Ind.,  on  Thursday  morning, 
May  17th,  1866.  The  Pennsylvania  Synod  had  elected  a 
full  delegation,  consisting  of  J.  A.  Seiss,  C.  P.  Krauth, 
G.  F.  Krotel,  C.  W.  Schaefter,  S.  K.  Brobst,  B.  M. 
Schmucker,  S.  Laird,  and  C.  Pretz,  H.  Lehman,  L.  L. 
Houpt,  C.  F.  Norton,  C.  Heinitsch.  In  order  to  secure 
their  attendance  the  Ministerium  had  postponed  its  own 
annual  meeting  which,  according  to  time-honored  cus- 
tom, always  convened  on  Trinity  Sunday.  The  opening 
sermon  was  preached  by  the  President,  Dr.  S. 
Sprecher,  on  I  Thess.  v.  19-21.  It  made  a  most  painful 
impression  on  the  members  of  the  Pennsylvania  delega- 
tion, as  **an  extraordinary  mingling  of  the  most  danger- 
ous assumptions  of  Romanism  in  the  one  direction,  and 
of  the  dreariest  rationalism  in  the  other,  ...  a  plea 
for  hopeless  schism,  sectarianism  and  heresy."  When,  a 
few  weeks  afterwards,  it  appeared  in  print,*  Dr. Krauth 
reviewed  it  at  length  in  the  Lutheran  (August  23d. 
1866).     There  he  says: 

One  great  fallacy  which  underlies  the  whole  argument 
and  comes  to  the  surface  in  a  great  variety  of  phases  is, 
that  Lutheranism  is  not  a  system  of  doctrine,  but  merely 
one  of  the  rules  of  Hermeneutics ;  not  a  result,  but  a 
process, — or.  rather,  a  theory  of  process.  This  process, 
according  to  Dr.  S.,  goes  on  indefinitely;  and  the  results 
may  vary  according  to  the  time,  place,  person  or  church 

*  See  Lutheran,  December  27,  1884. 

t  The   Apostolic    Method    of   Realizing  the  True   Ideal  of  the 
Church.      Baltimore  :  T.  Newton  Kurtz,     p.  44. 


158  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Cuav.XW. 

which  uses  the  process.  Lutheranism  may  successively 
mean  everything  and  anything  which  the  craziness  of 
an  abuse  of  the  right  of  private  judgment  may  cover  with 
the  pretenses  of  Protestant  investigation.  Lutheranism 
may  be  Unitarian,  Pelagian,  Calvinistic,  Baptist,  Armin- 
ian,  as  the  current  shifts.  Provided  only  that  nothing  in 
the  way  of  "writings  or  creeds  of  men  come  between  them 
and  the  examination  of  the  Bible,"  twenty  men  may 
reach  twenty  different  results,  and  all  be  equally  good 
Lutherans.  A  man  may  have  twenty  different  phases  of 
credence,  and  be  equally  Lutheran  through  the  whole. 
The  Lutheran  Church  may  have  a  new  set  of  doctrines 
in  every  generation,  and  teach  the  children  to  deride  the 
faith,  and  trample  on  the  teachings,  of  their  fathers  and 
mothers. 

It  has  hitherto  been  supposed  that  the  Luth- 
eran Church  owed  her  being  to  her  having  "proved  all 
things,"  and  having  by  this  process  found  that  which  is 
good,  holding  fast  to  it,  and  to  this  very  end  embodying 
it  in  her  Confessions.  But  it  seems  this  was  a  mistake. 
It  is  not  what  she  finds,  but  the  way  she  hunts  for  it, 
that  gives  her  character.  She  is  to  assume  that  the  prov- 
ing is  never  done,  but  always  to  be  done,  and  three  cen- 
turies after  her  credulous  profession  that  she  has  the 
truth,  is  to  go  to  work  seriously  to  find  it,  aided  by  Drs. 

Poor,    fond,   old   mother!      She   thought   her 

merchantman  had  found  the  great  pearl  at  the  old  Wit- 
tenberg long  ago,  but  it  seems  that  was  but  paste.  She 
must  go  now  to  the  new  Wittenberg,  not,  indeed,  to  find 
the  pearl,  but  to  learn  that  pearls  are  subjective,  and  that 
"nothing  is  good  or  evil,  true  or  false,  but  thinking 
makes  it  so." 

The  fact  is  that  these  principles  root  up  the  faith 
utterly.  They  ignore  the  divine  origin,  perpetuity,  and 
heavenly  guidance  of  the  Church,  they  put  the  teaching 
power  of  the  Bible  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  below  that 
of  an  ordinary  arithmetic  and  of  a  country  schoolmaster. 
It  is  too  mild  to  call  such  views  Latitudinarism ;  they  are 
logically  Nihilism.      They  do  their  work  so  effectually 


i866.]  THE  CRISIS  AT  FORT  WAYNE.  159 

that  they  would  not  only  leave  no  Lutheran  Church,  but 
they  would  leave  no  Church  at  all, — they  leave  no  solid 
ground  of  the  "one  faith"  which  has  always  been  held, 
and  must  ever  be  held,  somewhere  in  the  world,  and 
whose  perishing  would  be  the  perishing  of  the  Church 
itself.  We  have  left  us  but  a  mere  mirage  of  whimseys 
and  notions.  They  give  us  a  rule  of  faith  which  never 
generates  faith,  a  Creed  by  which  no  man  can  know 
what  we  believe ;  they  give  us  a  state  of  mind  in  which  we 
do  not  know  what  we  believe,  or  whether  we  are  to  be- 
lieve at  all.  They  ''quench  the  Spirit,"  by  declaring  that 
in  the  first  and  simplest  elements  of  Christian  faith.  He 
has  not,  in  the  lapse  of  two  thousand  years,  led  the 
Church  into  all  truth.  They  "despise  prophesying,"  by 
regarding  the  Holy  Scriptures  not  as  clear,  with  the 
power  of  generating  a  sure  faith,  but  as  a  set  of  riddles 
whose  meaning  men  are  still  guessing,  and  are  to  keep 
on  guessing,  with  nothing  to  decide  whose  guess  is  right. 
They  "prove"  nothing  so  as  to  establish  it  as  good,  and 
firmly  to  be  held  to.  but  do  their  mischievous  worst  to 
unsettle  what  the  Church,  taught  by  the  Spirit  in  the 
Word,  has  reached  and  confessed.  A  better  text  for  the 
discussion  of  this  sort  of  "true"  Lutheranism  would  have 
been :  "Ever  learning  and  never  able  to  come  to  the 
knowledge  of  the  truth." 

At  the  organization  of  the  convention,  when  the  roll 
of  the  Synods  was  called,  the  President  refused  to  receive 
the  credentials  of  the  Pennsylvania  delegation  with  the 
following  declaration :  "The  Chair  regards  the  act  of 
delegates  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod,  by  which  they 
severed  their  practical  relations  with  the  General  Synod, 
and  withdrew  from  the  partnership  of  the  Synods  in  the 
governing  functions  of  the  General  Synod,  as  the  act 
of  the  Synod  of  Pennsylvania,  and  that  consequently  that 
Synod  was  out  of  practical  union  with  the  General  Synod 
up  to  the  adjournment  of  the  last  convention,  and  as  we 
cannot  know  officially  what  the  action  of  that  Synod  has 


l6o  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIY. 

been  since,  she  must  be  considered  as  in  that  state  of 
practical  withdrawing  from  the  governing  functions  of 
the  General  Synod,  until  the  General  Synod  can  receive  a 
report  of  an  act  restoring  her  practical  relations  to  the 
General  Synod ;  and,  as  no  such  report  can  be  received 
until  said  Synod  is  organized,  the  Chair  cannot  know  any 
paper  offered  at  this  stage  of  the  proceedings  of  the 
Synod  as  a  certificate  of  delegation  to  this  body."  As  a 
matter  of  courtesy,  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth  requested  permis- 
sion to  ask  the  President  for  the  word  or  words  of  the 
Constitution  or  laws  of  the  General  Synod,  which  gave 
him  authority  to  make  such  a  decision. 

The  President  said  in  reply :  "I  exercise  this  authority, 
because  I  cannot  officially  know  that  the  Pennsylvania 
Synod  is  in  practical  relations  with  the  General  Synod." 
Dr.  Krauth  said :  "That  is  not  the  point.  I  do  not  ask 
you  why  you  exercise  the  authority, — but  from  whence 
you  derive  your  authority.  What  article  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, or  law  of  the  General  Synod  gives  you  such  author- 
ity?" Dr.  Sprecher  said:  "It  is  not  from  a  possession 
of  power,  but  from  a  lack  of  power  that  I  do  not  receive 
your  credentials."  Dr.  Krauth  replied:  "Then  we  are  to 
understand  that  you  have  no  Constitutional  right  to  reject 
our  credentials."  An  appeal  being  taken,  the  decision 
of  the  Chair  was  sustained  by  a  majority  of  yy  against  24 
votes,  and  the  heated  discussion  on  the  "case  of  the  Synod 
of  Pennsylvania,"  which  lasted  through  several  days,  had 
no  other  result  than  to  affirm  that  this  deliberate  action 
had  been  "regular  and  Constitutional."  There  was  no 
alternative  left  to  the  delegates  from  Pennsylvania  but  to 
withdraw  and  again  to  report  to  their  Synod.  After  they 
had  left  the  convention.  Dr.  W.  A.  Passavant  presented 
a  protest  against  the  action  of  the  General  Synod,  signed 
by  22  delegates,  belonging  to  the  Synods  of  New  York 
(4),  Pittsburg  (5),  Ohio  (4),  Iowa  (3),  Northern  In- 
diana (3),  Minnesota  (i),  Hartwick  (i),  Illinois  (i). 


i866.]  THE  FINAL  BREACH.  l6l 

A  few  weeks  afterwards  (June  7-9,  1866)  the  Minister- 
ium  of  Pennsylvania  met  in  special  session,  at  Lancaster, 
Pa.,  for  the  consideration  and  adoption  of  its  revised  Con- 
stitution. When  the  second  chapter,  declaring  the  faith  of 
the  Synod,  came  up  for  discussion,  Dr.  Krauth  proposed 
the  full  and  explicit  statement  of  the  Synod's  doctrinal 
position,  essentially  the  same  as  in  the  Constitution  of  the 
Theological  Seminary  at  Philadelphia.  An  animated  dis- 
cussion ensued  in  which  the  point  was  raised  that  this 
was  in  reality  a  change  of  doctrinal  basis.  Dr.  Krauth 
showed  that  his  amendment  was  not  intended  to  present 
anything  new,  but  to  make  that  which  had  already  been 
adopted,  clear,  that  the  Synod  had  actually  held  this  posi- 
tion in  her  published  Confession  for  more  than  a  century, 
and  while  there  had  been  sad  times  of  practical  departure 
from  this  faith  in  her  past  history,  she  was  now  reviving 
and  confessing  her  faith  anew.  The  declaration  of  faith, 
as  proposed  by  him,  was  finally  adopted  by  a  rising  vote, 
only  three  members  dissenting,  who  were  excused  from 
voting. 

At  its  regular  annual  convention,  beginning  June  10, 
1866,  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania,  after  hearing 
the  report  of  its  delegates  to  the  Fort  Wayne  Convention, 
cordially  approved  of  their  action,  and  formally  declared 
its  connection  with  the  General  Synod  dissolved,  because 
it  had  been  "unjustly  deprived  of  its  right  by  the  late 
convention  of  delegates  at  Fort  Wayne,  and  because  of 
its  conviction  that  the  task  of  uniting  the  conflicting  ele- 
ments in  the  General  Synod  has  become  hopeless,  and 
the  purpose  for  which  it  was  originally  formed  has  sig- 
nally failed."  Thus  the  long-continued  and  far-reaching 
conflict,  in  which  the  great  principle  of  all  true  unity  of 
Church  and  Confession  was  really  at  stake,  was  finally 
brought  to  a  decision,  on  what  might  seem  to  have  been,  a 
mere  parliamentary  question,  and  the  attempt  has  been 
made  repeatedly  to  show  that  the  breach  at  Fort  Wayne 


l62  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chav.XW. 

took  place  not  at  all  for  the  sake  of  the  Confession,  but 
simply  on  a  point  of  order,  and  perhaps  even  as  the  result 
of  personal  feelings.  But  even  the  leader  of  the  Missouri 
Synod,  Dr.  Walther,  at  once  and  unreservedly  defended 
the  Pennsylvanians  against  such  charges. 

Scarcely  any  event,  he  said,  within  the  bounds  of 
the  Lutheran  Church  of  North  America  has  ever  afforded 
us  greater  joy  than  the  withdrawal  of  the  Synod  of  Penn- 
sylvania from  the  unionistic  so-called  General  Synod. 
This  is  a  step  which  will  undoubtedly  lead  to  conse- 
quences of  the  utmost  importance,  and  of  the  most  salu- 
tary character.  The  plan  to  give  prominence  and  supre- 
macy in  this  land,  by  means  of  the  "General  Synod" 
to  a  so-called  American  Lutheranism,  which  ignores  the 
distinctive  doctrines  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  and  to 
compel  the  truly  Lutheran  Synods  to  occupy  a  separ- 
atistic,  isolated  and  powerless  position,  is  completely  frus- 
trated by  this  step.  How  uncomfortable  the  General 
Synodists  are  in  view  of  this,  they  show  most  clearly  by 
maintaining  again  and  again  that  the  Synod  of  Pennsyl- 
vania did  not  leave  them  on  account  of  doctrine,  but  on 
account  of  the  treatment  received  at  Fort  Wayne.  They 
know  right  well  what  a  blow  it  would  give  them  if  it  were 
known  that  the  oldest  and  largest  Synod  of  their  con- 
nection withdrew,  because  the  General  Synod  had  de- 
parted from  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Lutheran  Church. 

Any  one  willing  to  read  the  history  of  those  days  with 
an  unprejudiced  eye,  must  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  great  battle  was  not  for  a  mere  technicality,  but  for  a 
principle  of  the  highest  importance.  It  was,  as  Dr. 
Krauth  said,  in  his  address  before  the  Pittsburgh  Synod 
(October,  1866)  : 

The  conflict  of  truth  against  error,  truth  against  force, 
truth  against  false  compromise.  .  .  .  Men  pass  away, 
generations  come  and  go,  but  principles  abide  forever. 
.  .  .  With  her  eternal  principles,  what  shall  be  the  future 


i866.]  TRUE  UNITY  ONENESS  IN  FAITH.  163 

of  our  beloved  Zion  in  this  land?  Shall  it  be  conflict, 
division,  weakness,  or  shall  it  be  peace,  unity,  zeal,  un- 
folding all  her  energies  ?  It  is  unity.  Every  difficulty  in 
her  way,  every  barrier  to  her  progress,  proceeds  from 
tlie  lack  of  unity.  But  what  is  the  unity  of  the  Church? 
That  question  was  answered  three  centuries  ago  by  the 
Reformers,  and  fifteen  centuries  before  that  in  the  New 
Testament.  True  unity  is  oneness  in  faith,  as  taught  in 
the  Gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  We  are  one  with 
the  Church  of  the  Apostles,  because  we  hold  its  faith ; 
one  with  the  Church  of  the  Reformers,  alone  because  we 
hold  its  faith.  Outward  human  forms  are  nothing; 
ecclesiastical  government,  so  far  as  it  is  of  man,  is  noth- 
ing; all  things  are  nothing,  if  there  be  not  this  oneness 
of  faith.  With  it  begins,  in  its  life  continues,  in  its  death 
ends,  all  true  unity.  There  can  be,  there  is,  no  true  unity 
but  in  the  faith.  .  .  .  The  one  token  of  this  unity,  that  by 
which  this  internal  thing  is  made  visible,  is  one  expres- 
sion of  faith,  one  "form  of  sound  words,"  used  in  simple 
earnestness,  and  meaning  the  same  to  all  who  employ  it. 
You  may  agree  to  differ;  but  when  men  be- 
come earnest,  difference  in  faith  will  lead  first  to  fervent 
pleadings  for  the  truth,  and,  if  these  be  hopelessly  un- 
heeded, will  lead  to  separation.  All  kinds  of  beliefs  and 
unbeliefs  may  exist  under  the  plea  of  toleration ;  but 
when  the  greatest  love  is  thus  professed,  there  is  the  least. 
Love  resulting  from  faith  is  God's  best  gift.  Love  that 
grows  out  of  opposition  or  indifference  to  faith,  God 
abhors.  There  can  be  no  true  love  where  there  is  not 
also  true  hatred, — no  love  to  truth  without  abhorence  of 
error.  The  love  which  works  against  faith  is  not  of 
God.  ...  In  Christ  we  can  alone  find  unity.  Only  when 
we  meet  in  this  centre  of  all  true  unity  will  we  have  peace. 
And  we  can  be  in  Christ  only  in  a  faith  which  accepts 
His  every  word  in  His  own  divine  meaning,  and  shrinks 
with  horror  from  the  thought  that,  in  the  prostituted 
name  of  peace  and  love,  we  shall  put  upon  one  level  the 
pure  and  heavenly  sense  of  His  Word  and  the  artful 
corruption  of  that  sense  by  the  tradition  of  Rome  or  the 
vanity  of  carnal  reason.      (November  8,  1866.) 


164  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XIV. 

Having  severed  its  connection  with  the  General  Synod 
the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania  at  once  took  steps 
toward  the  organization  of  a  general  ecclesiastical  body, 
representing  the  interests  of  the  Church  in  this  country, 
on  a  truly  Lutheran  basis.  A  Committee  was  appointed, 
(Krotel,  Krauth,  Mann,  C.  W.  Schaeffer,  Seiss,  B.  M. 
Schmucker,  Brobst,  Welden,  Laird;  Norton,  H.  H. 
Muhlenberg,  Houpt,  Trexler,  Heinitsch,  Lehman,  Pretz, 
Endlich,  Mattes)  and  charged  to  prepare  and  issue  a 
fraternal  address  to  all  Evangelical  Lutheran  Synods, 
ministers  and  congregations,  in  the  United  States  and 
Canada,  which  confess  the  Unaltered  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion, inviting  them  to  a  convention  for  the  purpose  of 
forming  a  union  *  of  Lutheran  Synods.  The  fraternal 
address,  issued  by  this  Committee,  and  written  by  Dr. 
Krauth,  under  date  of  August  loth,  1866,  presented  the 
following  points : 

The  Synod  of  Pennsylvania  has  not  assumed  tjie 
serious  responsibility  of  inviting  such  a  Conference,  with- 
out reasons  of  the  gravest  kind.  It  is  most  clear  that 
the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  in  North  America  needs 
a  general  organization,  first  and  supremely  for  the  main- 
tenance of  unity  in  the  true  faith  of  the  Gospel,  and  in 
the  uncorrupted  sacraments,  as  the  Word  of  God  teaches 
and  our  Church  confesses  them ;  and,  furthermore,  for 
the  preservation  of  her  genuine  spirit  and  worship,  and 
for  the  development  of  her  practical  life  in  all  its  forms. 
It  is  no  less  clear  that  there  is  no  existing  organization 
adapted  to  these  grand  ends,  or  capable  of  being  adapted 
to  them.  There  has  been  no  union  of  any  kind  among 
all  the  nominally  Lutheran  Synods  in  America.    The  only 

*The  original  recommendation  of  the  Committee  report,  (Dr. 
Mann,  Chairman),  had  been,  ' '  to  correspond  with  other  Lutheran  Sy- 
nods, with  reference  to  the  propriety  of  calling  a  couvention  of  such 
Lutheran  Synods,  churches  and  individuals,  as  may  be  favorable  to 
the  organization  of  a  general  ecclesiastical  body,"  etc. 


i866.]         A   GENERAL   ORGANIZATION  NEEDED.  165 

Body  pretending,  even  in  name,  to  be  in  any  sense  a 
General  Synod,  never  embraced  all  the  Synods.  But  that 
Body  has  ceased  to  retain  even  the  ratio  which  it  once 
held,  and  does  not  now  embrace  half  the  membership  of 
the  Lutheran  Church,  and  it  is  just  those  portions  of  our 
Synods  which  are  most  thoroughly  consistent  with  the 
faith  of  the  Church,  which  are  excluded  from  it,  while 
the  part  which  remains  with  it  is  largely  in  undisguised 
or  covert  warfare  with  the  Confession  of  our  Church,  on 
every  point  which  gave  her  distinctive  being  over  against 
the  errors  of  both  Rome  and  of  rationalistic  sectarian- 
ism. All  hopes  of  the  "General  Synod"  ever  becoming  in 
our  Church  what  its  name  appears  to  claim,  have  become 
fainter  and  fainter,  until  finally,  by  receiving  as  integral 
elements  what  its  Constitution  excluded,  and  by  denying 
a  place  in  its  organization  to  elements  whose  full  rights 
of  representation  were  guaranteed  by  its  Constitution 
and  confirmed  by  its  own  solemn  act,  it  ceased  to  be  such  a 
Body  as  that  Constitution  defines,  and  has  no  moral  right 
to  be  considered  or  called  a  General  Synod,  even  in  the 
very  doubtful  sense  in  which  it  might  once  have  been 
entitled  to  that  name. 

A  great  necessity  is,  therefore,  laid  upon  us,  in  the 
Providence  of  God,  at  once  to  take  steps  to  meet  a  want, 
which  has  been  so  urgent,  and  the  painful  consciousness 
of  which  continually  grows.  We  are  imperatively  called 
upon  to  confer  together  for  the  formation  of  wise  plans, 
which  shall  avoid  the  serious  mistakes  which  weakened 
and  finally  brought  to  an  unhappy  termination  the  former 
effort.  In  the  light  of  the  history  of  our  whole  Church, 
and  more  especially  of  this  Western  portion  of  it,  we 
are  called,  in  the  simplicity  of  the  faith  of  our  fathers, 
and  in  the  honest  singleness  of  their  heart  and  confession, 
clearly  to  declare  what  is  the  great  end  for  which  we 
build,  to  wit :  The  pure  Gospel  and  its  Sacraments,  the 
preservation  and  extension  of  which  can  alone  give  to 
Synods  a  true  value.  The  Church  needs  an  organiza- 
tion in  which  Christian  liberty  shall  work  under  the  law 
of  love  and  in  the  grace  and  beauty  of  divine  order,  in 


i66  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

which  shall  be  unmistakably  acknowledged  the  common 
faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,  the  testimony  of  which 
is  found  in  unmingled  purity  in  the  Unaltered  Augsburg 
Confession,  in  its  native,  original  and  only  true  sense, 
on  which  our  Church  rests  as  her  unchangable  confes- 
sional foundation.  Such  an  organization  would  have  the 
vigor  necessary  to  efficient  action,  and  to  so  much  uni- 
formity as  is  needed  to  embody  true  unity,  yet,  would 
provide  such  complete  and  wise  safeguards  as  to  pre- 
vent it  from  being  made  the  instrument  of  inequality 
or  oppression,  or  from  being  tempted  to  establish  what 
is  merely  human,  and  w^hich  binds  only  by  the  law  of 
love  and  the  just  principles  of  church  order,  as  if  it  were 
in  the  sphere  of  conscience  and  of  divine  necessity.  It 
would  avoid  the  weakness  of  government,  which  first 
runs  into  anarchy,  and  then  by  reaction  into  tyranny.  It 
would  shun  the  laxity  in  doctrinal  obligation  in  which 
error,  first  satisfied  in  being  tolerated,  speedily  goes  on 
to  rule,  and  at  length  on  the  ruins  of  faith,  establishes 
the  most  intolerant  of  all  proscriptiveness,  the  proscrip- 
tiveness  of  unbelief. 

The  condition  and  wants  of  our  Church  in  this  land 
make  it  clear  that  we  are  not  moving  in  this  matter  on 
insufficient  or  doubtful  grounds.  With  our  communion 
of  millions  scattered  over  a  vast  and  ever-widening  terri- 
tory, with  the  ceaseless  tide  of  immigration  to  our 
shores,  with  the  diversity  of  surrounding  usages  and 
of  religious  life,  with  our  various  nationalities  and 
tongues,  our  crying  need  of  faithful  ministers,  our  imper- 
fect provision  for  any  and  all  of  the  urgent  wants  of 
the  Church,  there  is  danger  that  the  genuinely  Lutheran 
elements  may  become  gradually  alienated,  that  misunder- 
standings may  arise,  that  the  narrow  and  local  may  over- 
come the  broad  and  general,  that  the  unity  of  the  Spirit 
in  the  bond  of  peace  may  be  lost,  and  that  our  Church, 
which  alone  in  the  history  of  Protestantism  has  main- 
tained a  genuine  catholicity  and  unity,  should  drift  into 
the  sectarianism  and  separatism  which  characterize  and 
curse  our  land. 


i866.]  THE  FRATERNAL  ADDRESS.  167 

Apart  from  these  extraordinary  reasons,  our  general 
vocation  as  a  Church,  the  interest  of  Foreign  and  Home 
Missions,  of  theological,  collegiate  and  congregational 
education,  of  institutions  of  beneficence,  of  a  sound  relig- 
ious literature,  all  demand  such  an  organization  as  shall 
enable  our  whole  Church  in  this  land,  in  its  varied 
tongues,  to  work  together  in  the  unity  of  a  pure  faith, 
and  in  the  harmony  of  mutual  good  understanding  and 
love. 

Moved  by  these  great  facts,  and  by  hearty  desire  for 
the  unity  of  Zion,  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania,  the 
oldest  of  Lutheran  Synods  in  the  United  States,  has  felt, 
that  under  Providential  guidance  whose  history  is  too 
recent  and  familiar  to  all  to  need  repetition  here,  her 
motives  could  not  be  misunderstood  in  taking  this  neces- 
sary initiative  to  future  action. 

In  conformity  with  her  resolution,  therefore,  we  invite 
you  to  appoint  delegates  to  represent  you  in  a  Convention 
for  the  purpose  of  forming  a  union  of  Lutheran  Synods. 

The  fraternal  address,  inviting  ministers,  congrega- 
tions and  Synods  to  co-operate  with  the  Mother-Synod 
in  the  formation  of  a  new  general  Body,  called  for  a 
response  and  decision  on  the  part  of  those  to  whom  it  had 
been  sent.  Among  them  were  Synods  that  had  never 
been  in  connection  with  the  General  Synod,  and  others 
which  had  belonged  to  that  body  up  to  the  time  of  the 
Fort  Wayne  Convention.  With  some  there  could  hardly 
be  any  doubt,  from  the  beginning,  which  side  they  would 
take  in  their  decision.  Others,  however,  like  the  Pitts- 
burgh Synod  and  the  New  York  Ministerium,  could 
hardly  be  expected  to  reach  anything  like  an  unanimous 
decision  on  this  important  question.  These  would  form 
the  principal  battlefields  on  which  the  two  sides  would 
have  to  measure  their  strength.  Efforts  were  made  by  the 
advocates  of  the  General  Synod  to  counteract  the  effect 
of  the  fraternal  address  of  the  Pennsylvania  Ministerium. 
The   West    Pennsylvania   Synod   unanimously   resolved 


l68  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Cuav.XW. 

(York,  September  13th,  1866)  to  appoint  "a  Committee 
of  five  members  to  prepare  an  address  to  the  churches  on 
the  secession  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  from  the  General 
Synod,  and  in  response  to  the  charges  since  published 
against  said  body."  The  Committee  (J.  A.  Brown,  H. 
L.  Baugher,  S.  S.  Schmucker,  A.  H.  Lochmann,  F.  W. 
Conrad)  compelled  the  venerable  father.  Dr.  Charles 
Philip  Krauth,  in  Gettysburg,  who  was  nearing  the  end 
of  his  earthly  pilgrimage,  to  add  his  name,  "by  request 
of  Committee."  Their  paper  was  cordially  endorsed  by 
a  similar  Committee  of  five,  appointed  by  the  East 
Pennsylvania  Synod.*  Thus  the  Mother-Synod  had,  as 
Dr.  G.  F.  Krotel  said,  "a  monitor  on  the  right  and  on 
the  left," — the  monitors  being  two  Synods  which  had, 
years  ago,  been  formed  on  the  territory  of  the  Synod  of 
Pennsylvania  by  the  withdrawal  of  a  number  of  her 
ministers  and  congregations.  And  these  Synods  now 
condemned  the  action  of  the  Mother- Synod  as  "seces- 
sion," as  the  "schismatical  and  unchristian  conduct  of 
those  who  are  seeking  to  divide  and  destroy  the  General 
Synod  of  our  Church."  They  alleged  that  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Synod  was  not  "driven  from  the  General  Synod, 
but  deliberately  withdrew."  "It  is  true,"  said  Dr.  G.  F. 
Krotel  in  answer  to  this  charge,  "the  delegates.  .  .were 
not  driven,  by  blows  or  hisses,  from  the  Church  and 
Synod,  but  the  demands  made  of  them,  and  the  opposi- 
tion raised  against  them,  for  years,  and  the  spirit  exhib- 
ited at  Fort  Wayne,  literally  drove  them  out.  If  there 
is  a  way  to  compel  men  to  enter  the  kingdom,  without 
physical  force,  then  there  is  also  a  way  to  compel  honest 
men  to  go  out  of  a  body  like  that  at  Fort  Wayne.  The 
Fort  Wayne  technicality  did  not  drive  them  out  except 

*  Address  to  the  Ministers  and  Members  of  the  Evangelical  Luth- 
eran Church  in  the  United  States.  J.  E.  Wible,  Printer,  Gettysburg, 
Pa.    8  pp. 


1866-6;.]  ACTION   OF  THE  SYNODS.  169 

in  so  far  as  it  was  the  last  .  .  .  exhibition  of  the  cause 
of  all  our  troubles,  the  last  straw  that  made  the  burden 
insufferable."  {Lutheran,  October  nth,  1866.) 

The  Pittsburgh  Synod  met  in  October,  1866,  and  after 
an  animated  and  lengthy  discussion,  condemned  the 
decision  of  the  General  Synod  at  Fort  Wayne  "as  inju- 
dicious, unjust  and  unconstitutional,"  revoked  its  action 
of  1852  by  which  it  had,  in  common  with  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Synod,  entered  the  General  Synod,  accepted  the 
invitation  of  the  ''Fraternal  Address,"  and  appointed  dele- 
gates to  represent  it  at  the  proposed  Convention.  Dr. 
C.  P.  Krauth  was  present  at  this  important  meeting  and, 
by  an  elaborate  address  in  which  he  reviewed  the  whole 
conflict,  contributed  materially  to  the  decision  reached  by 
the  Pittsburgh  Synod,  of  which  he  had  formerly  been  an 
honored  member.  The  minority  of  eleven  pastors,  in 
sympathy  with  the  General  Synod,  withdrew  and  organ- 
ized a  new  Synod. 

At  the  Ministerium  of  New  York,  which  was  in 
session  a  few  days  before,  the  result  of  the  crisis  had 
been  similar.  There  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown,  the  President  of 
the  General  Synod,  appeared  as  delegate  from  the  W'est 
Pennsylvania  Synod,  but  the  Ministerium  refused  to 
recognize  him  in  that  capacity.  Final  action  on  the 
relation  of  the  New  York  Ministerium  to  the  General 
Synod  was  postponed  for  a  year,  the  question  being  sub- 
mitted to  a  vote  of  the  congregations,  and  the  officers 
were  appointed  a  Committee  to  attend  the  Convention 
called  by  the  Pennsylvania  Ministerium.  and  to  report  on 
it.  At  its  next  annual  meeting  (September,  1867),  the 
New  York  Ministerium  formally  dissolved  its  connection 
with  the  General  Synod,  and  the  minority  at  once  organ- 
ized a  new  Synod.  This  result  completely  changed  the 
character  of  the  New  York  Ministerium.  Up  to  this  time 
the  English  element  had  had  full  control  of  the  Synod, 
though,    numerically,    the    Germans    had    the    majority. 


170  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

Now  the  Synod  at  once  became  an  almost  exclusively 
German  body. 

RECONSTRUCTION.        STUDIES     IN     CHURCH      POLITY. 
SYNODICAL  AUTHORITY. 

As  soon  as  the  crisis  in  the  protracted  ecclesiastical  con- 
flict had  been  reached,  when  the  smoke  had  hardly  cleared 
away  from  the  battlefield  in  Fort  Wayne,  Dr.  Krauth  at 
once  turned  from  the  polemics  of  the  preceding  years 
to  the  constructive  work  of  reorganization.  The  ques- 
tion of  the  day  was  the  formation  of  a  new  general  body 
on  a  sound  basis.  It  fell  to  Dr.  Krauth  to  prepare  the 
fundamental  articles  of  Church  Polity  for  the  organiza- 
tion of  such  a  body.  He  was  convinced  that  the  dis- 
tressing condition  of  the  Church  of  those  days  was  the 
result  not  only  of  laxity  in  doctrine,  but  also  of  serious 
defects  in  the  sphere  of  Church  government.*  He  de- 
plored the  great  lack  of  authority  and  discipline  which 
had  abundantly  manifested  itself  everywhere  in  the 
administration  of  Church  affairs,  and  endeavored  to 
draw  the  lines  for  a  stronger  and  more  efficient  Church 
government,  in  harmony  with  the  Scriptures  and  the 
Confession  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  His  preparatory 
work  in  this  direction  appeared  in  a  series  of  articles  on 
"Our  Church  Polity  in  America;  Character  and  Author- 
ity of  Synods,  Representative  Principles."  (Lutheran 
and  Missionary,  June  21,  28;  July  5,  19;  September  20, 
1866.)  Starting  from  the  declaration  of  the  Smalcald 
Articles  that  "The  decisions  of  Synods  are  decisions  of 
the  Church"  he  presents  in  extenso  the  testimonies  of 
leading  Lutheran  theologians,  like  Calovius,  Buddeus, 
Quenstedt,  Hollazius,  on  the  authority  of  Synods.  The 
position  taken  by  him  on  these  questions  roused  some 

*  Compare  also  Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs'  History  of  the  Evangelical  Luth- 
eran Church  in  the  United  States,  pp.  460-470. 


i866.]  CHURCH  GOVERNMENT.  171 

suspicion  and  criticism  on  the  part  of  conservative  Luth- 
erans in  the  West  (Missouri  and  Iowa),  who  objected 
particularly  to  his  parallel  between  Civil  and  Ecclesiasti- 
cal government,  and  seemed  to  be  afraid  of  hierarchical 
tendencies,  and  an  infringement  of  true  evangelical 
liberty,  while  Dr.  Krauth  maintained  that  his  views  were 
not  essentially  at  variance  with  those  advocated  by  Dr. 
Walther  on  this  point. 

In  "a  word  of  explanation,"  he  replies  to  the  criticism 
of  the  Luthcraner,  and  defines  his  position  more  fully 
to  this  effect: 

We  do  not  mean  to  make  the  parallel  absolute  between 
Civil  and  Ecclesiastical  government.  Their  functions, 
aims  and  means  are  utterly  diverse.  We  meant  and  said 
no  more  than  this:  that  the  government  of  the  Church, 
generically,  is  also  a  divine  institution,  the  Church  is  a 
true  kingdom,  Christ  is  King,  the  Bible  is  its  absolute 
Constitution  and  law,  ministers  are  divinely  called.  Bap- 
tism is  a  divine  admission  into  the  kingdom,  its  remission 
of  the  sins  of  the  penitent  and  believing  is  done  by  God's 
authority,  its  retention  of  the  sins  of  the  unbelieving  binds 
in  heaven.  Its  means  are  the  Word  and  the  Sacraments, 
and  its  restraining  powers  are  reproof  and  correction 
with  the  Word,  and  the  holding  back  of  unfit  men  from 
the  Sacraments.  And  as  the  genus  of  Church  govern- 
ment is  divine,  and  as  the  genus  cannot  exist  as  an  abstrac- 
tion, but  must  be  concrete  in  the  species,  and  as  tiie 
species  is  left  in  certain  respects  to  the  freedom  of  the 
Church,  her  decisions  made  in  the  way  in  which  her  own 
people  and  pastors  have  agreed  they  shall  be  made — do 
bind  them,  so  long  as  they  voluntarily  and  freely  remain 
in  the  organization,  in  and  by  which  they  have  them- 
selves agreed,  that  the  various  matters  which  are  pro- 
perly the  subjects  of  Church  freedom  shall  be  determined. 
The  freedom  of  the  Church  is  a  very  different  thing  from 
the  licentious  lawlessness  of  the  individual  church  mem- 
ber, with  which  it  is,  in  this  country,  continually  con- 


172  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV, 

founded.  Far  be  it  from  us  to  imagine  that  all  the 
Bishops,  Synods  and  Councils  in  the  universe,  past, 
present  or  to  come,  can  make  ordinances  which  can  "bind 
the  conscience,"  or  can  make  their  decisions  "a  necessary 
service  of  God,  the  violation  of  which,  if  it  could  be 
done  without  offense,  would  yet  be  sin" — but  we  do  hold 
that  the  churches  can  agree  to  commit  the  decision  of 
matters,  confessedly  belonging  to  Christian  freedom,  to 
the  determination  of  their  own  representatives,  under 
certain  limitations  guarding  against  abuse,  and  that  when 
decisions  are  thus  made,  the  voluntary  parties  are  bound 
by  their  own  agreements,  while  they  continue  in  this 
organization,  to  respect  its  decisions; — in  other  words, 
we  hold  to  the  right  of  the  churches  to  represent  them- 
selves— to  agree  what  shall  be  given  to  the  control  of 
the  representative  body,  and  we  hold  that  they  are 
either  bound  to  be  faithful  to  the  compact  or  may  justly 
be  excluded  from  its  benefits.  We  entirely  agree  with  our 
friend  in  the  Liitheraner  that  the  strength  of  the  Church 
does  not  depend  upon  a  "strong  government,"  but  on  the 
unity  of  faith,  doctrine  and  confession.  But  "strong"  and 
"weak"  are  relative  terms.  We  want  a  real  government; 
— something  which  shall  hold  in  a  genuine  outward  bond, 
however  mild,  the  true  confessors  of  our  Church's  faith, 
and  enable  them  to  work  in  harmony,  and  if  we  under- 
stand the  principles  which  control  the  government  of  the 
Synod  of  Missouri,  we  are  sure  that  we  desire  nothing 
stronger,  nor  better  in  the  government  of  our  whole 
Church  in  this  country,  than  these  principles  would  give 
us.  We  only  ask  a  Church  Government  which  shall  bind 
us  by  the  gentle  laws  of  love  and  peace,  which  shall  take 
offenses  out  of  the  way,  which  shall  be  an  aid  in  causing- 
all  things  to  be  done  decently  and  in  order  in  the 
Church — which  shall  be  a  safeguard  to  conscience,  and 
shall  not  lay,  nor  attempt  to  lay  burdens  on  it.  The 
decisions  of  a  Synod  which  shall  be  such  a  government 
representatively,  will  indeed  be  merely  human,  as  the 
decisions  of  all  earthly  governments  are  merely  human — 
nay,  often  manifestly  wrong;  nevertheless,  we  hold  that 


i866.]  A  DIFFICULT  PROBLEM.  173 

the  generic  g-overnmental  principles,  and  the  right  of 
representation  are  as  really  of  God  in  the  Church  as  in 
the  State.  The  obligation  to  conform  to  the  decisions  of 
such  a  Synod,  is  the  obligation  of  peace,  love  and  order; 
and  where  violation  of  them  (except  on  the  ground  of 
conscience)  creates  scandal  and  offense,  there  is  a  moral 
obligation  to  conform  to  them.  (Augsburg  Confession 
67,  53.)  But  with  the  Church  of  Christ  there  are  forces 
mightier  than  the  sword  of  state,  and  more  manifestly 
divine,  because  they  belong  not  to  the  realm  of  force,  but 
to  the  kingdom  of  the  Spirit. 

THE  READING  CONVENTION. 

The  Convention  called  by  the  fraternal  address  of  the 
Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania  met  in  the  old  Trinity 
Church,  at  Reading,  Pa.,  December  11 -14,  1866.  The 
men  who  had  been  chiefly  instrumental  in  bringing  to- 
gether this  important  meeting  of  Lutherans  in  America 
fully  realized  the  delicacy  and  difficulty  of  the  work  be- 
fore them. 

Superficial  unions,  wrote  Dr.  Krauth  (December 
6,  1866),  are  easier  than  deep  and  substantial  ones: 
men  who  are  simply  looking  for  a  policy  can  more  readily 
coalesce  than  those  who  are  profoundly  in  earnest  in 
securing  great  principles;  blind  partisanship  is  more 
easily  controlled  by  those  who  will  fall  in  with  it,  than 
honest  men,  who  are  moved  by  conviction  and  who  are 
willing  to  move  others  by  it  alone.  The  Lutheran  Com- 
munion on  this  Western  Continent  has  one  of  the 
grandest  problems  which  have  ever  been  given  to  the 
Church  to  solve.  She  is  numerically  one  of  the  largest 
of  the  churches;  she  has  varied  nationalities  to  combine 
into  one  well  disciplined  host  of  her  Lord.  Her  sons  hold 
the  Word  of  God,  and  teach  its  precious  truths  in  more 
tongues  than  any  of  the  other  churches  in  the  land, 
perhaps  in  more  than  all  the  others  together.  Her  people 
have    been    trained    under    different    governments    and 


174  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chaf.XIV. 

diverse  forms  of  church  pohty,  and  thousands  of  them 
have  endured  wrongs  of  State  usurpation  and  the  mis- 
chief of  rationahstic  or  pseudo-unionistic  teachings.  To 
bring  this  mighty  mass  into  a  harmonious  whole  will  not 
be  the  work  of  a  day;  but  it  is  a  work  so  glorious,  so 
happy,  so  divine,  that  it  may  fill  the  measure  of  the  fullest 
ambition  which  a  holy  heart  can  cherish,  to  do  some- 
thing, even  a  very  little  something,  toward  its  con- 
summation. Brethren  are  to  see  eye  to  eye  on  great 
questions  of  doctrine  and  of  the  polity  of  the  Church. 
The  little  and  the  local  is  to  give  way  to  broader  and 
nobler  conceptions  of  the  genius  and  mission  of  our 
Church :  preferences  are  to  yield  to  principles,  and  our 
membership  is  to  show  that  the  assumption  in  regard  to 
the  fidelity  of  the  people,  on  which  the  free  government 
of  our  Church  rests,  is  not  a  mistaken  one.  Let  all  that 
love  Zion  remember  the  Convention  in  their  most  fer- 
vent prayers. 

It  was,  indeed,  a  springtide  of  warm  fraternal  affec- 
tion, of  honest  attachment  to  the  faith,  and  of  brightest 
hopes  and  prospects  for  the  future  of  the  Church,  during 
those  cold  winter  days  of  1866,  when  the  Convention 
met  in  Reading.  Such  an  assembly  had  never  before  been 
seen  in  the  Lutheran  Church  of  this  country.  There 
were  side  by  side  Pennsylvania,  Ohio  (three  Synods), 
Wisconsin,  Michigan,  Pittsburgh.  Minnesota,  Iowa,  Mis- 
souri, Canada,  New  York  and  the  Norwegian  Synod. 
The  Swedes  were  represented  by  letter  from  Dr.  Hassel- 
quist.  Professor  M.  Loy,  of  Columbus,  preached  the 
opening  sermon  on  I  Cor.  i.  10.  Rev.  G.  Bassler, 
of  the  Pittsburgh  Synod,  was  elected  President.  Dr. 
Krauth  had  prepared  two  sets  of  theses  on  "Funda- 
mental Principles  of  Faith,"  and  on  "Fundamental  Prin- 
ciples of  Ecclesiastical  Power  and  Church  Government 
(Church  Polity),"  which  were  fully  discussed  and 
adopted  by  the  Convention.  They  afterwards  formed 
the  basis   for  the  Constitution  of  the  General  Council. 


1866.1  THE  PRIVILEGE   OF  DEBATE. 


175 


The  agreement  on  all  these  fundamental  points  was 
perfect.  It  was  only  when  the  practical  question  arose 
of  proceeding  at  once  to  the  organization  of  a  general 
body  on  those  principles,  that  a  divergence  of  opinion 
appeared.  The  representatives  of  the  Missouri  Synod 
and  the  Norwegian  Synod  declared  that  they  considered 
the  formation  of  a  general  body  premature,  and  wished 
that  there  should  be  more  conferences  for  further  delib- 
eration and  discussion.  Dr.  Krauth  met  their  difficulties 
and  objections  in  the  kindliest  spirit.  "In  a  free  Confer- 
ence," he  said,  "we  may  discuss  questions,  but  we  decide 
nothing  definitely,  and  bind  nothing.  In  a  general  church 
organization  these  questions  can  be  decided  for  those 
who  are  within  it — and  definitely  so,  so  far  as  the  deci- 
sion does  not  oppress  the  conscience.  All  who  can 
acknowledge  each  other  as  Lutherans  in  a  free  confer- 
ence, can,  with  equally  good  conscience,  unite  in  a  general 
church  organization  of  the  Synods  they  thus  acknowl- 
edge. The  very  fact  of  their  being  really  and  truly 
Lutherans  should  prevent  them  from  continuing  sepa- 
rate ;  it  should  bring  them  together  in  one  united  organ- 
ized body.  Even  in  a  free  conference  there  would  have 
to  be  an  acknowledgement  of  each  other  as  Lutherans 
before  we  came  together.  .  .  .  Feeling  as  I  do  the  great 
force  of  the  arguments  of  the  brethren  who  prefer  a  free 
conference,  I  rejoice  that  both  preferences  as  to  mode 
may,  to  a  certain  degree,  be  met.  Let  those  of  us  who 
are  prepared,  unite  in  an  organization  and  invite  our 
brethren  of  the  Missouri  and  Norwegian  Synods  to  come 
to  us  for  a  free  conference  on  the  points  not  settled.  .  .  . 
Let  the  organization  be  an  organization  to  those  who 
enter  it ;  but  to  brethren  who  agree  with  us  in  principles, 
in  aims  and  in  the  ends  proposed,  and  differ  only  as  to 
the  best  means  and  mode  of  securing  those  aims  and 
that  end,  to  them  let  it  be  a  free  conference." 

This    suggestion    of    Dr.    Krauth    found    recognition 


176  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

in  the  Constitution  of  the  General  Council,  Art.  I,  Sec.  2, 
in  the  following  provision :  "The  General  Council  shall 
have  the  power  of  extending  the  privilege  of  debate  to 
the  representatives  of  Synods  which  adopt  the  funda- 
mental principles,  but  which  have  not  ratified  the  Consti- 
tution." 

It  was  in  the  sixth  session  of  the  Convention,  held 
on  the  afternoon  of  December  14th,  at  St.  John's  German 
Lutheran  Church,  that  the  report  of  the  Committee 
on  the  Outline  Plan  of  a  Constitution  was  finally  adopted, 
and  thereby  the  organization  of  the  General  Council 
was  formally  decided.  With  grateful  and  rejoicing 
hearts  the  Convention  sang  "Now  Thank  We  All  Our 
God."     (Nun  Danket  Alle  Gott.) 

The  rupture  in  the  General  Synod  which  led  to  the 
formation  of  the  General  Council  involved  not  only 
Synods,  but  also  local  congregations,  and  in  many  cases 
led  to  a  re-adjustment  of  their  Synodical  relations.  Here 
and  there  congregations  themselves  were  divided,  and 
bitter  litigations  were  carried  on  before  the  courts  by 
the  opposing  parties,  for  the  possession  of  the  church 
property.  The  contentions  were  of  a  particularly 
acrimonious  character  on  the  territory  of  the  Pittsburgh 
Synod,  where  the  minority,  adhering  to  the  General 
Synod,  claimed  to  be  the  historic  and  lawful  Pittsburgh 
Synod,  entitled  to  its  name  and  all  its  rights  in  Church 
and  State.  Thus,  in  the  City  of  Pittsburgh  itself,  the 
First  English  Church  was  dragged  into  court,  and  finally 
an  opposition  congregation  was  organized  under  the  pas- 
torate of  Dr.  J.  H.  W.  Stuckenberg.  Similar  contro- 
versies occured  in  Leechburg,  Williamsport,  Allentown. 
Dr.  Krauth  was  repeatedly  involved  in  these  lawsuits, 
being  cited  as  an  expert  and  witness  for  the  General 
Council  party,  while  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown  usually  represented 
the  other  side.  Among  his  papers  extensive  sketches  are 
preserved,   of   the   testimony   prepared   by  him   for  the 


i868.]  LEECHBURG  CHURCH  CASE.  lyy 

court  in  each  case.  Of  special  interest  was  the  case  of 
Hebron  EvangeHcal  Lutheran  Church  in  Leechburg. 
There  the  request  of  the  General  Council  party,  of  some- 
what doubtful  majority,  for  a  change  of  charter,  was 
refused  by  the  court,  as  a  matter  of  right  and  not  of 
faith.  Dr.  Krauth  was  summoned  by  telegraph  to  appear 
(June,  1868),  and  at  once  responded  in  deference  to  the 
judgment  of  Rev.  G.  Bassler,  the  President  of  the  Gen- 
eral Council.  There  were  also  present,  from  the  General 
Council  side,  G.  A.  Wenzel,  S.  Laird,  H.  W.  Roth,  J. 
Sarver  (the  pastor),  J.  K.  Melhorn,  D.  McKee,  M. 
Schweigert,  H.  E.  Jacobs.  The  General  Synod  was 
represented  by  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown,  J.  H.  W.  Stuckenberg, 
S.  F.  Breckenridge,  J.  A.  Ernest,  G.  F.  Ehrenfeld,  and 
others.  For  five  days  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown  was  on  the 
stand;  one  half-day  in  direct  examination,  and  the  rest 
under  cross-examination,  conducted  by  Hon.  E.  S. 
Golden,  of  Kittanning.  Apart  from  the  legal  aspect  of 
the  case,  the  theological  contention  in  Kittanning  was, 
on  the  one  side,  to  prove  that  the  recognition  of  other 
confessions  besides  the  Augustana  in  the  Fundamental 
Principles  of  the  General  Council  involved  a  departure 
from  the  faith  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  This  became 
a  difficult  problem  for  the  General  Synod  side,  when  Dr. 
Brown,  under  cross-examination,  was  compelled  to  testify 
that  the  professors'  oath  in  the  Seminary  at  Gettysburg 
originally  required  subscription  not  only  to  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  but  to  both  the  Catechisms  of  Luther.  The 
examination  of  Dr.  Brown  having  consumed  the  entire 
week,  Dr.  Krauth  was  not  heard.  One  day,  however, 
large  placards  were  posted  about  the  streets,  announcing 
that  Dr.  Krauth  would  deliver  a  lecture  on  one  of  the 
evenings,  in  the  German  Lutheran  Church,  on  the  theme : 
"The  Life  Questions  of  Lutheranism,  the  Life  Questions 
of  Christianity."  The  lecture  was  attended  by  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  General  Synod,  as  well  as  those  of  the 


178  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

General  Council.     Its  substance  afterwards  appeared  in 
the  Lutheran  in  a  series    of  articles  under  another  title.* 

DOMESTIC  AFFLICTION. 

During  the  years  covered  by  this  period  of  Dr. 
Krauth's  life  there  is  a  noticeable  falling  off  in  his 
private  correspondence.  Hardly  any  letters  of  this  time 
are  found  among  his  papers.  "I  feel,"  he  writes  to 
his  daughter  (March  14th,  1865),  "that  it  must  be  an 
unnatural  state  of  things  in  which  my  letters  to  my 
children  and  to  my  father  must  be  so  rare.  And  yet,  for 
this  state  of  things  I  cannot  hold  myself  responsible." 
And  this  period,  when  his  mind  was  so  completely  en- 
grossed with  the  great  questions  and  struggles  that 
agitated  the  Church,  was  a  time  of  serious  losses  and 
sore  bereavement  in  his  family  life.  On  May  30th,  1867, 
his  venerable  and  beloved  father  fell  asleep  in  Jesus. 
(See  Vol.  I,  p.  24.)  About  a  year  and  a  half  before 
he  suffered  a  terrible  blow  in  the  loss  of  his  two  youngest 
children  who  died  within  24  hours  from  each  other,  in 
Germantown,  Philadelphia, — ^Julia  Katharine,  on  Thurs- 
day morning,  October  19,  1865,  aged  three  years,  three 
months  and  ten  days ;  and  Robert  Lane,  on  the  following 
Friday  morning,  aged  eight  months  and  three  days. 

We  are  passing,  he  writes  to  his  friend  Thomas  Lane, 
in  Pittsburgh,  through  the  Valley  of  the  Shadow  of 
Death.  Two  of  our  children  lie  dead  within  our  walls. 
Our  darling  little  Julia,  after  four  weeks  of  sickness, 
passed  away  from  us  in  the  twilight  of  the  morning  of 
Thursday.  All  night  the  storm  had  been  wild.  The 
old  pines  had  seemed  to  struggle  with  the  gigantic  force 
of  the  winds,  and  the  leaves  swept  and  eddied  and  hurled 
themselves  against  the  window  panes  with  the  drifting 
rain.    All  night,  while  the  fearful  storm  was  raging,  our 

*  MS.  Memorandum  of  H.  E.  Jacobs. 


1865.]  THE  DEATH  OF  THE  CHILDREN.  lyg 

dear  little  one  wrestled  with  death.  Fainter  and  fainter 
grew  the  struggle.  .  .  .  The  calm  of  the  morning  came, — 
away  off  in  the  East  the  clouds  half  reflect  a  few  broken 
beams  of  light  which,  mingled  with  bright  shadows  of  the 
waving  branches  through  which  they  played — streamed 
upon  the  wall.  The  glory  of  another  world,  the  bright- 
ness of  the  throne  opened  upon  the  immortal  vision  of 
our  child,  as  the  weary  eyes  closed  for  the  last  sleep. 

Everything  seems  for  the  present  swallowed  up  in  her 
death.  She  was  the  idol  of  the  household.  There  was 
in  her  a  mingling  of  archness  and  gentleness  fascinating 
beyond  expression.  She  was  a  true  child,  but  with  a 
thousand  little  buddings  of  character  which  gave  promise 
of  womanly  graces.  She  sleeps  in  Jesus.  The  last  trace 
of  the  struggle  of  death  has  passed  from  her  face,  and 
she  lies  now  in  her  heavenly  whiteness,  her  long  eye- 
lashes resting  upon  her  cheek  as  if  in  sleep. 

Alas,  our  cup  which  seemed  to  us  streaming  in  an 
overflow,  was  not  yet  full.  Our  baby  whom  we  had 
named  Robert  Lane. — linking  a  dear  family  name  with 
a  name  which  is  precious  to  us  for  the  sake  of  the  dear 
friends  who  have  taught  us  to  love  it, — our  baby  had 
been  very  fragile  from  his  birth.  We  dared  not  expect, 
we  hardly  dared  to  hope  that  he  would  be  spared  to  us. 
His  eyes, — wonderfully  beautiful  and  expressive  with 
something  of  that  deep  gaze  of  reverie  which  great 
masters  have  given  to  the  eyes  of  the  infant  Saviour, — 
seemed  to  ponder  our  faces,  as  we  w^atched  him  so  early 
passing  into  the  shadow  of  mystery,  which  hangs  over 
our  sorrowing  world.  On  Friday  morning  he  passed 
away.  Both  our  dear  ones  will  sleep  in  the  same  grave. 
Julia  will  have  by  her  side  the  little  brother  to  whom  her 
innocent  loving  heart  had  so  turned  in  its  sweet  affection. 

In  these  hours  we  are  sustained  by  the  loving  kindness 
of  a  faithful  Saviour.  Cherished  friends  come  to  us  with 
their  sympathies,  and  their  offices  of  love.  It  is  not  what 
friends  can  say, — for  all  w^ords  except  those  of  our  God 
seem  powerless,  but  what  balm  there  is  in  what  they  are, 
in  the  knowledge  that  their  hearts  are  with  us.     Nothing 


i8o  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

that  can  alleviate  sorrow  has  been  wanting  to  us, — yet, 
oh,  how  weak  we  feel  ourselves. 

PASTORAL   WORK. 

During  all  those  years  Dr.  Krauth  did  abundant  pas- 
toral work  in  various  English  Lutheran  Churches,  such 
as  St.  John's,  St.  Stephen's  and  St.  Peter's,  in  Philadel- 
phia. For  nearly  a  whole  year  he  served  St.  John's 
Church  (Race  Street  above  Fifth),  during  the  absence 
of  its  pastor.  Dr.  J,  A.  Seiss,  having  for  some  time  been 
in  feelDle  health,  left  for  Europe  and  the  East  in  April, 
1864,  and  after  an  extended  journey  through  the  Holy 
Land  returned  again  in  the  Spring  of  1865.  On  March 
loth,  a  formal  reception  was  tendered  to  him  by  his 
congregation.  Dr.  G.  F.  Krotel  welcomed  him  in  behalf 
of  the  clergy  and  the  Lutherans  of  Philadelphia.  Dr. 
Krauth  presented  the  greetings  of  the  congregation. 
In  the  course  of  his  warm-hearted  and  eloquent  address 
he  said : 

Through  the  ancient  homes  of  our  fathers,  we  followed 
you,  with  faith  in  the  God  of  our  fathers.  When  you 
reached  that  land  which  is  glorified  forever  by  the  touch 
of  those  sacred  and  bleeding  feet,  which  eighteen  hundred 
years  ago  "were  nailed  for  our  advantage  on  the  bitter 
cross,"  each  hallowed  place  assumed  to  us  a  more  vivid 
reality,  as  through  your  eyes  we  seemed  to  look  upon 
it ;  the  waving  of  the  cedars  and  the  murmurs  of  the 
Jordan  brought  their  low  music  to  our  ear.  We  knelt  at 
Bethany,  and  the  hand  of  the  Glorified  seemed  lifted 
over  us.  We  entered  Jerusalem,  and  its  dust  seemed  holy. 
The  lessons  of  the  Church  Year  assumed  a  strange  vivid- 
ness. Still,  still  in  faith  we  followed  your  footsteps, 
assured  that  you  would  return. 

A  few  years  afterwards,  when  Dr.  Seiss  took  charge 
of  the  newly  organized  congregation  of  the  Holy  Com- 
munion,  Dr.    Krauth  again   supplied   the  pulpit   of   St. 


1866-67.]  PASTORATE  IN  ST.  STEPHEN'S.  l8i 

John's  until  a  successor  had  been  found.  His  services 
were  highly  appreciated  by  the  congregation,  and  a 
special  pew  was  reserved  for  Dr.  Krauth's  family  in 
that  venerable  church. 

In  1866  and  the  following  years  we  find  him  as  pastor 
of  St.  Stephen's,  at  that  time  a  small  struggling  Mission 
Church  in  West  Philadelphia.  On  June  5th,  1866,  their 
little  sanctuary  was  consecrated,  Dr.  Krauth  himself 
preaching  the  sermon,  and  one  of  the  collegiate  pastors 
of  St.  Michael's  and  Zion's  German  Churches,  in  Phila- 
delphia (A.  S.),  performing  the  act  of  consecration.  It 
was  the  time  of  the  crisis  in  Fort  Wayne.  The  English- 
speaking  ministers  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod  happened 
to  be  out  of  town.  So  Dr.  Krauth  sent  for  his  young 
German  friend  rather  than  ask  one  of  the  "American 
Lutherans"  of  the  City,  to  assist  in  the  consecration 
service. 

During  his  pastorate  in  St.  Stephen's  he  w^as  particu- 
larly interested  in  the  introduction  of  the  historical  litur- 
gical order  of  the  Lutheran  service  in  his  young  congre- 
gation. In  these  efforts  he  had  the  devoted  and  intelli- 
gent co-operation  of  the  organist  of  the  congregation, 
his  own  daughter.  The  "Jubilee  Service,"  written  for  the 
three  hundred  and  fiftieth  anniversary  of  the  Reforma- 
tion (published  by  J.  B.  Lippincott  &  Co.,  Philadelphia, 
1867),  was  for  the  first  time  fully  used  in  St.  Stephen's. 
It  was  "meant  to  exhibit  something  of  the  devotional  life 
of  that  great  era,  and  thus  to  show  how,  proving  all 
things,  our  Church  held  fast  to  that  which  is  good,  joy- 
ously accepting  the  treasures  of  the  deepest  and  purest 
love  and  piety,  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  continued  to 
bear  witness  to  our  ascended  Lord  throughout  the  ages. 
...  As  our  Church  gave  them  back  to  the  people,  as  a 
noble  part  of  her  reformatory  work,  it  is  her  special 
vocation  to  guard  the  heritage  she  restored."  The  little 
pamphlet   of   24   pages   presents   a   large   collection   of 


I  82  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIV. 

liturgical  material  under  the  following  abridged  Rubric 
of  the  Service:  Invitatory,  Confession,  Introit,  Gloria  in 
Excelsis,  Collect,  Epistle,  Gradual,  Gospel,  Creed,  Hymn 
of  Invocation,  Sermon,  General  Prayer,  Hymn,  Preface 
with  Sanctus,  Communion  with  Agnus  Dei,  Closing 
Collect,  Benediction,  together  with  31  hymns,  mostly 
translations  from  German  sources.*  Dr.  Krauth's 
arrangement  of  the  Liturgical  material  does  not  present 
that  clear  distinction  between  the  Minor  Services  (Matin 
and  Vespers),  and  the  Main  Service  (Communion), 
which  is  so  characteristic  of  the  service  of  the  Church 
Book  in  its  final  shape.  It  rather  seeks  to  combine  in  one 
comprehensive  service,  the  materials  of  all  these  different 
services,  making  no  attempt  to  restore  either  the  Matin 
or  the  Vespers  in  their  original  form,  as  separate  services. 
Nevertheless,  the  little  booklet  did  much  good  in  prepar- 
ing the  way  for  the  Church  Book  in  our  English  Luth- 
eran congregations. 

*  His  two  Christmas  hymns,  A  Babe  is  Born  in  Bethlehem,  trans- 
lated from  the  Latin,  Puer  natus  in  Bethlehem,  and,  The  Happy 
Christmas  Comes  Once  More,  based  on  Bishop  Grundwig's  Danish 
original,  Del  kimer  nu  til  Juleftst,  were  prepared  for  the  first  Christ- 
mas celebration  of  St.  Stephen's  Sunday  School.  They  have  both 
found  a  place  in  the  General  Council's  Sunday  School  Book. 


FIFTEENTH  CHAPTER. 

THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL. 
1867-1883. 

The  General  Council  of  the  EvangeHcal  Lutheran 
Church  in  North  America  was  organized  in  the  Jubilee 
year  1867,  when  the  three  hundred  and  fiftieth  anni- 
versary of  Luther's  ninety-five  Theses, — nailed  to  the 
door  of  the  Castle-Church  at  Wittenberg,  October  31, 
1 5 17 — was  celebrated  throughout  the  Lutheran  Churches. 
The  first  convention  was  opened  November  20,  1867,  in 
the  Church  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  Fort  Wayne,  Indiana, 
the  very  same  building  where,  eighteen  months  before, 
the  delegation  of  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania  had 
been  ruled  out  of  the  General  Synod  by  its  presiding 
officer. 

On  the  evening  of  the  same  day  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth 
preached,  what  might  be  called,  the  opening  sermon, 
from  which  the  following  abstract  is  presented : 

THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL. 
ITS  DIFFICULTIES  AND  ENCOURAGEMENTS. 

Zech.  iv,  6.  7. 

The  first  difficulty  of  the  General  Council  arises  from 
the  largeness  of  its  scope.  Our  ideal  is  a  Council  em- 
bracing every  Lutheran  of  the  millions  who  speak 
German,  Danish,  Swedish  and  English,  all  genuine 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Synods  in  the  States  and  the  Can- 
adas.  Comparatively  easy  would  be  our  work,  were  we 
confined  to  one  country,  tongue,  or  nationalitv. 

183 


184  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

The  Council  will  meet  this  difficulty  by  confining  it- 
self strictly  to  its  own  sphere.  Avoiding  all  sectional 
and  political  questions,  respecting  all  nationalities,  yet 
knowing  none,  it  must  represent  that  true  and  general 
Lutheranism  which  is  the  servant  of  no  nationality, 
language  or  section,  and  which  working  together  for 
our  common  Lord  in  His  purified  Church,  makes  diverse 
tongues  but  diverse  organs  for  His  praise,  diverse  na- 
tionalities but  diverse  sources  for  the  glory  of  His  king- 
dom, and  diverse  sections  only  the  widening  of  the  sphere 
in  which  He  reigns.  A  pure,  living,  and  loving  Christian- 
ity which  can  embrace  this  Continent,  yea,  the  world,  is 
true  Lutheranism,  the  Lutheranism  of  the  Cross,  Evan- 
gelical Lutheranism. 

The  second  difficulty  is  the  nature  of  its  basis.  The 
General  Council  would  unite  these  vast  interests  on  a 
basis  of  principle.  Policy  is  easy,  and  selfishness  natural, 
but  principle  is  difficult.  Ours  is  the  sublimest  of  prin- 
ciples, fealty  to  God's  eternal  truth.  Without  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  His  plentitude,  our  work  is  simply  impossible. 

Look  at  our  basis.  It  accepts  one  rule  of  God's  Word. 
It  derives  but  one  faith  from  that  Word.  It  would  have 
that  faith  confessed  in  the  same  words,  used  in  one  and 
the  same  sense.  It  designs  to  apply  this  faith  to  all 
questions  which  have  arisen,  or  may  arise,  as  to  the 
doctrine,  worship,  practical  life  and  discipline  of  the 
Church.  We  want  no  great  external  organization  at  the 
expense  of  the  truth.  This  Council  is  no  child  of  the 
spirit  of  the  time.  Thus  far  has  the  Lord  led  us.  We 
accept  the  same  rule  of  faith.  We  acknowledge  the  cor- 
rectness of  one  and  the  same  confession  of  faith.  But 
do  we  all  understand  that  confession  throughout  in  the 
same  sense? 

In  regard  to  many  points  of  immeasurable  importance, 
indisputably  there  is  harmony  among  all, — both  the  par- 
ties to,  and  those  whom  we  desire  to  be  parties  to,  this 
contract.  The  general  confessions  are  accepted  and  un- 
derstood in  the  same  sense.  They  are  in  harmony  on 
the  distinctive  articles  of  generic  Protestantism,  on  all 


186;. ]  DIFFICULTIES   OF   THE  COUNCIL.  185 

the  great  generic  Evangelical  doctrines,  and  on  all  the 
absolutely  indisputedly  distinctive  doctrines  of  the  Luth- 
eran Church.  The  Lutheranism  which  the  General  Coun- 
cil embraces,  and  desires  yet  to  embrace,  has  a  relative 
unity  incomparably  beyond  that  of  anything  which,  out- 
side of  this  circle,  pretends  to  the  name  of  Lutheranism. 

Jealousy  of  a  general  ecclesiastical  authority  is  a  diffi- 
culty which  acts  upon,  and  is  reacted  upon  by  all  the 
others.  Some  fear  that  the  great  and  inalienable  rights 
which  God  has  given  the  congregation  and  the  individual 
Christian  may  be  infringed  upon.  Say  they,  the  congre- 
gation is  divine,  the  Council  human,  therefore  the  con- 
gregation is  safer  than  the  Council.  History  is  appealed 
to.  Corrupt  Councils  have  set  forth  false  doctrines  and 
persecuted  the  followers  of  the  truth.  Experience  too 
has  shown  our  Church's  ability  to  get  on  without  a  gen- 
eral body;  the  futile  attempts  toward  such  a  body  in 
this  country  are  cited. 

The  congregation  is  divine,  and  has  the  promise  of 
God's  special  aid  by  His  Spirit  through  the  Word.  What 
it  does  in  accordance  with  its  divine  rights  is  also  of  the 
Divine.  It  may  become  a  part  of  its  divinely  marked 
duty  to  exercise  the  divine  right  of  representation.  The 
congregations  represented  whether  by  direct  power,  as 
in  the  local  Synod,  or  by  mediate  power,  as  in  the  call  of 
a  general  Council,  through  the  Synods,  are,  within  the 
bounds  fixed  by  the  congregations,  the  congregations 
themselves.  Such  a  body  of  representatives  is  a  congre- 
gation of  congregations.  In  our  country  the  people  rule 
and  legislate  for  themselves  through  their  representa- 
tives ;  and  so  with  congregations.  The  promise :  Where 
two  or  three  are  met  in  My  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst 
of  them,  is  verified  whether  the  two  or  three  be  from  one 
or  from  three  congregations.  No  less  is  it  verified  if 
these  three  be  chosen,  and  meet  at  the  direction  of  the 
congregations.  Thus  too,  whether  a  hundred  or  a  thou- 
sand congregations  have  their  representatives  in  a  coun- 
cil. The  promise  is  verified  to  such  a  body,  since  it  is  a 
congregation  of  believers  in  a  temporary  organization 


l86  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

and  since  it  is  created  under  their  divine  charter  by  the 
congregations  who  have  founded  it. 

The  legislative  acts  of  congregations,  because  of  their 
divine  organization,  are  also  divine,  so  far  as  they  really 
represent  the  will  of  God.  Divinely  led,  they  represent 
themselves,  and  the  body  thus  formed  is  mediately  divine. 
Congregations  render  decisions  which  bind  the  conscience 
of  the  member,  because  these  decisions  accord  with  the 
divine  Word.  When  one  congregation  calls  to  its  aid 
the  divinely  illuminated  wisdom  of  all  the  congregations, 
there  is  not  a  diminished  but  increased  probability,  that 
it  will  be  in  accordance  with  the  mind  of  the  Spirit. 

But  some  object  the  abuse  of  Councils.  We  reply  that 
all  power  may  be  abused.  The  power  of  choice  led  to 
the  fall.  The  power  of  steam  instead  of  carrying  us 
safely  might  have  dashed  us  to  pieces.  The  very  fear 
thus  confessed  implies  a  power  for  good  if  it  be  rightly 
used.  Guard  this  power  against  abuse,  and  what  a  gain 
the  Church  has.  A  true  General  Council  will  protect  the 
right.  Church  history  tells  of  glorious  Councils,  great 
palladia  of  the  faith.  The  Council  of  Nice  is  referred 
to  in  Article  I  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  In  our  Book 
of  Concord  portions  of  the  action  of  the  Councils  of 
Chalcedon  and  Ephesus  are  received  with  favor.  In  the 
preface  to  the  Augsburg  Confession  our  fathers  urged 
a  general  Council,  and  they  were  always  exceedingly 
anxious  for  it.  Says  Luther  in  the  preface  to  the  Smal- 
cald  Articles,  *T  desire  from  my  soul  that  a  free  Christ- 
ian Council  shall  be  convened."  Against  such  a  general 
Council  the  enemies  of  the  Reformation  fought,  and 
manoeuvered  with  all  their  might.  Our  fathers  believed, 
and  believed  rightly,  that  a  free  general  Council  would 
have  thrown  all  Europe  into  the  arms  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. They  charged  as  one  of  the  greatest  sins  of  the 
Pope  that  he  took  away  from  the  Church  the  power  of 
judging,  making  it  impossible,  by  his  refusal  to  hold 
such  a  council,  to  remove  false  doctrines  or  wrong  modes 
of  worship,  "causing  in  consequence  the  loss  of  many 
souls."     "Councils  were  not  condemned,  but  the   Pope 


i867.]  LOYALTY  TO  THE  FAITH.  187 

who  despises  Councils."  "The  judgments  of  Synods 
are  the  judgments  of  the  Church.  Tiie  power  of  judging 
and  determining  in  accordance  with  the  Word  of  God 
should  not  be  taken  from  the  Church." 

It  is  not  logic  to  argue  against  all  Councils  from  the 
sins  of  corrupt  Councils,  to  bring  up  what  was  done  un- 
der the  intimidation  of  the  Pope  and  of  civil  power;  as 
if  this  Council,  free  from  intimidation  in  this  land  of 
free  thought  and  free  speech,  were  similar  to  these.  It 
is  not  logic  to  argue  from  Councils  whose  avowed  basis 
was  the  avowed  authority  of  men,  to  a  Council  based 
on  the  Word  of  God  alone,  nor  should  it  be  argued  from 
Councils  composed  of  men  in  the  legalism  of  self-right- 
eousness, to  a  Council  pervaded  to  the  heart  by  the  glor- 
ious doctrine  of  justification  by  faith;  from  Romish  or 
hierarchical  Councils,  to  this  of  brethren  who  rejoice  in 
grasping  each  other's  hands  as  equals ;  from  Italian  in- 
trigue, to  German  openness  and  honesty ;  from  politico- 
ecclesiastical  bodies,  to  this  which,  by  its  very  definition 
of  the  real  scope  of  Christian  Synods,  forever  excludes 
the  partisan  topics  of  the  hour.  And  should  the  General 
Council  prove  unworthy  of  the  trust  reposed,  we  have 
our  refuge.  It  is  clearly  defined  under  what  circum- 
stances Christian  men  would  be  justified  in  leaving  it, 
and  how  that  is  to  be  done.  When  the  General  Council 
forsakes  the  faith,  the  men  of  faith  should  and  will  for- 
sake her,  but  not  before.  It  is  the  eternal  faith  of  God's 
Word  which  our  Church  confesses,  to  which  we  are  loyal. 
"Love,"  says  Luther,  "endureth  all  things,  faith  endureth 
nothing."  In  the  sphere  of  love  we  will  give  up  every- 
thing for  the  love  of  Christ  and  our  brethren.  In  the 
sphere  of  faith  we  will  give  up  nothing;  no,  not  a  jot  or 
a  tittle :  not  to  men,  friend  or  foe ;  not  to  devils,  not  to 
secure  life  itself.  And  the  love  which  endureth  all  things 
in  the  sphere  of  love,  springs  alone  from  that  faith,  which, 
in  the  sphere  of  faith,  endureth  nothing:  that  faith,  and 
that  alone  worketh  by  love.  In  the  unity  of  that  faith 
which,  because  it  is  inflexible  to  wrong,  by  wrongdoers  is 
called  bigotry;  in  the  unity  of  that  faith,  which  is  called 


l88  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

by  those  who  err  intolerance,  because  it  will  not  tolerate 
error,  in  that  unity  we  will  yield  our  mere  human  pre- 
ferences, however  dear,  to  the  wish  of  our  brethren  of  the 
faith.  We  will  yield  all  that  we  wish  in  the  human  con- 
stitution of  the  Church,  in  the  human  elements  of  her 
worship;  everything  that  is  of  man,  however  beautiful 
and  approved.  The  more  inflexible  our  faith  is,  the  more 
yielding  is  our  charity;  the  more  intolerant  our  faith  is, 
the  more  enduring  is  our  love ;  and  this  we  believe  to  be 
the  spirit  of  this  body.  Treason  is  treason  to  the  eternal 
faith  of  God's  Word,  not  to  a  traitorous  body  which 
renounces  or  chaffers  with  it.  Apostacy  is  apostacy  to 
the  truth;  and  the  forsaking  of  its  enemies,  and  secession 
from  secession,  is  the  first  demand  of  those  who  love 
true  union.  We  proclaim  before  men  and  angels,  that  if 
this  body  or  any  other,  is  finally  committed  to  false  doc- 
trine, or  to  a  clearly  false  profession  of  true  doctrine, 
it  is  not  a  mere  privilege  but  a  sacred  duty  to  leave  it, 
that  we  may  have  no  fellowship  with  works  of  darkness 
of  which  heresy  and  hypocrisy  are  among  the  darkest. 
God's  command  to  His  people  in  the  Babylon  of  Rome 
or  in  the  Babel  of  Rationalism  is  "Come  out  of  her,  my 
people,  that  ye  be  not  partakers  in  her  plagues." 

But  we  humbly  believe  that  this  Council  will  not  prove 
unworthy.  God  is  with  us,  my  brethren.  It  were  atheism 
to  deny  it.  That  providence  which  counts  our  hairs,  has 
not  without  an  object,  ordered  our  meeting  here.  The 
very  Cross  which  surmounts  this  edifice  seems  to  have 
been  put  there  in  unconscious  prophecy  of  this  hour.  For 
beneath  it  we  raise  the  banner  whose  centre  is  the  Cross. 
Our  confession  is  one  in  which  the  Cross  of  Christ  is  all. 
Our  mighty  dead,  our  noble  army  of  martyrs  and  con- 
fessors, as  this  Council  in  the  years  to  come  continues  its 
work,  will  look  down  from  their  high  homes,  and  in  glory, 
as  in  the  days  of  their  warfare,  ascribe  all  praise  to  the 
omnipotent  arm,  the  omnipotent  love  of  our  ascended 
Lord. 

The  headstone  of  the  temple  is  to  be  laid  in  heaven, 
and  the  voices  of  those  mighty  and  sainted  ones  whose 


1867-83.]    THESES  PREPARED  FOR  THE  COUXCIL.  189 

memory  we  hallow  through  all  these  days  of  Jiihilee,  shall 
be  united  with  us  in  the  cry  "Grace,  grace  unto  it." 
(Lutheran  and  Missionary  December  12,  1867,  from  Fort 
Wayne  Democrat.) 

Dr.  Krauth  was  at  that  time  in  the  prime  of  his  life, 
forty-four  years  old,  and  through  the  remaining  sixteen 
years  of  his  life  the  best  strength  of  his  mature  manhood 
was  devoted  to  the  interests  of  the  General  Council.  He 
had  prepared  the  way  for  its  formation  by  the  triumphant 
vindication  of  the  Lutheran  Confession  against  "Amer- 
ican Lutheranism."  He  had  drawn  up  the  "Principles 
of  Faith  and  Church  Polity"  on  which  its  constitution 
was  founded.  For  ten  years  he  was  the  honored  and  be- 
loved President  of  the  Body,  and  always  has  he  been 
recognized  as  its  foremost  theological  leader,  whose  pro- 
found scholarship,  whose  fearless  love  of  the  truth,  whose 
gentleness  and  forbearance  towards  those  who  differed 
from  him,  commanded  universal  respect  and  admiration. 
Whenever  important  points  of  doctrine  and  their  appli- 
cation to  the  practical  life  of  the  Church  were  under  dis- 
cussion, he  was  charged  with  the  preparation  of  the  lead- 
ing theses;  (On  Justification,  Minutes  of  1870;  On  Pul- 
pit and  Altar  Fellowship,  Minutes  of  1877.)  If  the  pre- 
sumptions of  the  Roman  hierarchy  were  to  be  met  and 
repelled,  as  in  the  Encyclica  of  Pius  IX  (September  13, 
1868)  to  "All  Protestants  and  other  Non-Catholics."  he 
was  entrusted  with  the  answer  which  informed  the  Pope, 
that  Lutherans  "are  not  Non-Catholic  Protestants,  but 
are  Protestants  against  Rome,  only  because  Rome  herself 
is  Non-Catholic,"  and  that  "Our  Church  believes  in  one 
Holy,  Catholic  Church,  the  Universal  Christian  Church, 
the  Communion  of  Saints,  whose  faith  she  confesses, 
and  of  which  she  is  a  pure  part,  and  her  true  people  living 
members."  If  it  was  a  question  of  the  Scriptural  prin- 
ciples for  the  organization  of  a  Christian  congregation, 


190  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

he  was  charged  with  drafting  a  model  constitution.  So 
also  in  matters  referring  to  the  order  of  service  in  the 
preparation  of  the  Church  Book,  his  voice  carried  the 
greatest  weight. 

For  many  years  he  had  been  an  industrious  and  en- 
thusiastic student  in  the  department  of  Liturgies.  (See 
Vol.  I,  pp.  154-155-)  The  results  of  his  investigations, 
published  in  a  series  of  articles  in  the  Lutheran  of  1866 
and  1867,  cover  the  whole  ground  of  the  main  service 
and  show  an  extensive  acquaintance  with  the  principal 
Agenda  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  Germany,  as  well  as 
with  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  its  history.  We 
are,  however,  inclined  to  think  that  most  of  this  liturgical 
material  was  compiled  by  Dr.  Krauth  considerably  be- 
fore its  publication.  For  on  several  points  the  position 
taken  by  him  on  the  floor  of  the  General  Council  in  1867 
differs  from  views  presented  in  those  articles. 

When  Dr.  Krauth  joined  the  Ministerium  of  Penn- 
sylvania, in  1865,  he  was  at  once  added  to  the  Church 
Book  Committee  of  that  Body.  At  that  time  the  Com- 
mittee had  been  at  work  for  ten  years;  they  had  pre- 
pared the  Liturgy  of  i860;  they  had  been  instructed  in 
1862  to  consider  the  question  of  preparing  a  collection  of 
hymns,  and  in  1863  proposed  and  were  instructed  to  pre- 
pare what,  in  its  result,  was  the  Church  Book,  and  its 
contents  were  then  fixed  in  all  essential  features.  In  1865 
they  had  made  and  printed  the  provisional  collection  of 
hymns,  and  had  done  much  work  on  the  other  parts,  but 
there  remained  the  working  out,  arranging  and  final  com- 
pletion of  all  the  changes  which  the  Liturgy  of  i860  was 
to  undergo,  and  the  careful  revision  of  the  collection  of 
hymns,  and  of  the  text  of  each  hymn.  In  all  this  work, 
from  1865  on.  Dr.  Krauth  took  an  active  and  prominent 
part  in  all  consultations  and  decisions  in  the  Committee, 


1866-69.]  LITURGICAL  WORK.  191 

and  his  elaborate  liturgical  studies*  gave  his  views  great 
weight  both  in  Committee  and  in  Synod.  His  sug- 
gestions and  proposals  made,  considered  and  adopted  in 
the  Committee  were  very  many.  Still,  Dr.  B.  M. 
Schmucker  did  not  think  that  any  part  of  the  text  of 
that  edition  was  wrought  out  and  presented  by  him,  ex- 
cept the  Versicles  and  a  few  Collects.  In  November, 
1869.  the  General  Council  ordered  the  preparation  and 
insertion  of  the  Introits  and  Collects  for  each  Sunday 
and  Festival  Day,  and  a  collection  of  special  Collects.  In 
the  preparation  of  these  Dr.  Krauth  had  a  very  prominent 
part.  The  Sunday  and  Festival  Day  Collects  were  al- 
ready determined,  and  only  the  translation  of  a  few  Col- 
lects needed  revision;  but  a  large  number  of  the  special 
Collects  were  sought  out  and  translated  by  Dr.  Krauth. 
But  in  all  the  work  of  revision,  requiring  many  and  pro- 
tracted meetings,  he  participated,  and  gave  much  time 
and  labor  to  the  work,  and  they  were  of  great  service  to 
the  Church,  t 

The  work  of  the  Pennsylvania  Committee  had  been 
submitted  to  the  Reading  Convention  of  1866,  which 
appointed  a  Committee,  representing  all  the  different 
Synods,  "to  aid  the  existing  Committee  of  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Synod  in  the  perfecting  of  their  contemplated 
Book."  At  the  first  Convention  in  Fort  Wayne  the  order 
of  service  in  the  projected  Church  Book  was  submitted 
for  discussion  and  adoption.  And  here  Dr.  Krauth  took 
issue  with  his  friend  Dr.  B.  M.  Schmucker,  the  chair- 
man of  the  Committee,  who  was  willing  to  sacrifice  the 
ancient  historical  order  of  the  Lutheran  service,  to  the 
"general  custom"  of  those  days,  in  the  proposition,  that 

*  See  his  pencil  notes  in  the  old  Agenda  and  Liturgical  works  in 
the  Library  of  the  Theological  Seminary,  at  Mount  Airy,  Philadelphia. 

t  See  Beale  M.  Schmucker,  Memorial  of  C.  P.  Krauth.     Printed 
for  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania.     Philadelphia,  1883.     Pp.  16,  17. 


192  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

the  main  service  should  begin  with  the  Introit,  followed 
by  the  Confession,  Kyrie  and  Absolution.  Over  against 
the  "unanimity  of  the  Committee''  Dr.  Krauth  appealed 
to  the  "unanimity  of  the  Church"  and  carried  his  point, 
that  the  Introit  be  restored  to  its  usual  and  proper  place 
in  the  service,  after  the  Confession. 

Another,  and  far  more  important  topic  on  which  a 
difference  arose  between  the  two  friends,  Dr.  C.  P. 
Krauth  and  Dr.  B.  M.  Schmucker,  was  the  Constitution 
for  Congregations.  At  the  third  convention  of  the  Gen- 
eral Council  (Chicago,  1869)  the  Executive  Committee 
reported  that  it  was  ready  to  submit  for  the  examination 
of  the  Body  "a  full  and  extended  Constitution  for  Con- 
gregations." It  was  ordered  to  be  published  and  sent 
down  to  the  Synods.  In  1872,  after  the  formulation 
of  the  confessional  basis  for  congregations,  and  the  ar- 
ticles defining  the  position  of  the  Pastor  had  been  deter- 
mined, a  new  Committee  was  appointed,  with  Dr.  Krauth 
as  chairman.  He  prepared  the  draft  of  the  Constitution 
which  was  recommended  by  the  Committee  for  adoption 
in  1875.  Dr.  B.  M.  Schmucker,  a  member  of  the  Com- 
mittee, presented  a  minority  report,  saying,  that,  while 
uniting  in  the  presentation  of  the  above  report  for  the 
consideration  of  the  Council,  he  did  not  unite  in  the 
recommendation  of  the  Committee  that  it  be  adopted. 
The  main  point  of  objection  on  Dr.  Schmucker's  part 
was  the  position  taken  by  Dr.  Krauth  with  reference  to 
the  Scriptural  offices  in  the  congregation,  the  Pastorate 
and  the  Diaconate.  The  Constitution  says :  "The  Chief 
Officers  of  the  Christian  congregation  are  named  in  the 
New  Testament,  Pastors  or  Shepherds,  Bishops,  Pres- 
byters or  Elders,  and,  as  they  that  have  the  rule  in  the 
Lord,  all  which  names  designate  one  and  the  same  class 
of  officers  whose  dignity,  rights  and  general  duties  are 
under  Divine  appointment  the  same,  and  are  inalienable 


1875]         COXSTITUTION  FOR  CONGREGATIOSS.  193 

and  unchangeable. — The  Deacons  are  primarily  the 
executive  aids  of  the  Pastor  in  the  work  of  Christ,  for 
and  in  the  Congregation.  They  shall  be  installed  with 
the  laying  on  of  the  Pastor's  hands."  Dr.  Schmucker 
thought  these  provisions  concerning  the  Pastorate  "too 
autocratic,  and  the  office  eminently  magnified."  He 
doubted  "whether  the  Pastorate  in  our  sense  of  the  term 
and  as  it  exists  among  us,  represents  the  whole  Presbyter- 
ship  of  the  New  Testament,  and  whether  it  is  true  that 
such  Pastorate  and  Diaconate  are  the  only  ordinary  and 
permanent  offices  in  the  congregations  of  the  primitive 
Church."  He  feared  that  "the  present  organization  of 
our  congregations  would  be  upset  by  this  provision,'^ 
(Letter  to  C.  P.  K.  September  23,  1875.)  I'''  support  of 
his  views  Dr.  Schmucker  might  have  appealed  to  the  testi- 
mony of  some  prominent  Lutheran  Theologians,  as 
Martin  Chemnitz,  Johann  Gerhard,  and,  in  recent  times, 
Dr.  C.  F.  W.  Walther,  who  held  that  the  distinction  be- 
tween teaching  Elders  (the  Pastors)  and  ruling  Elders 
(Lay-men)  was  scriptural,  being  based  particularly  on  I 
Tim  V.  17,  as  interpreted  by  these  Doctors.  Dr.  Krauth 
on  the  other  hand,  had  come  to  the  conclusion  that  no 
such  distinction  was  meant  in  this  passage,  if  rightly  un- 
derstood, that  the  New  Testament  Eldership  was  the  of- 
fice of  the  Pastor  alone,  while  the  only  auxiliary  office 
in  the  Church  was  the  Diaconate.  This  position,  which 
was  finally  approved  by  the  General  Council  in  the  adop- 
tion of  the  Constitution  for  Congregations  in  1880,  was 
a  decided  departure  from  the  universal  rule  and  practice 
of  Lutheran  Congregations  on  this  Continent,  since  the 
days  of  Henry  Melchior  Muehlenberg,  which  provided 
for  a  Church  Council  consisting  of  Elders  and  Deacons 
(Vorsteher).  There  is  no  doubt  that  this  feature  was 
adopted  by  the  Pennsylvania  German  Congregations 
from  the  early  Dutch  Reformed  and  German  Reformed 

13 


ig4  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

Churches  in  Pennsylvania,  the  Dutch  Lutheran  Churches 
in  New  York  and  New  Jersey,  and  ultimately  from  the 
German  Lutheran  Church  in  London,  and  the  Dutch 
Lutheran  Church  in  Amsterdam,  those  last  named  Luth- 
eran Churches  being  clearly  influenced  by  the  Presby- 
terian form  of  Church  Government  which  they  had 
learned  to  know  and  to  appreciate  in  England  and  in 
Holland.  (See :  The  Organi::ation  of  the  Early  Lutheran 
CJinrches  in  America.  By  Beale  M.  Schmucker,  D.D., 
Lutheran  Church  Review.     July,  1887.) 

This  whole  subject  was  treated  very  fully  by  Dr. 
Krauth  in  a  series  of  articles  (Lutheran,  December  31, 
1874.  to  February  18,  1875)  "Thetical  Statement  of  the 
Doctrine  concerning  the  Ministry  of  the  Gospel."  There 
he  says : 

In  I  Tim.  v.  17,  in  the  words  "the  Elders  that  rule 
well,"  the  emphasis  is  on  the  word  "well/'  and  the 
antithesis  is  not  between  two  classes,  with  official  distinc- 
tions, one  of  which  merely  rules,  and  the  other  does  not 
rule,  or  both  rules  and  teaches.  The  antithesis  is  between 
members  of  the  same  official  class,  some  of  whom  rule 
well,  others  do  not  rule  well.  The  word  "labor" 
(Kopiao)  means  to  work  hard,  to  toil,  and  has  special 
emphasis  given  it  by  parallelism  with  the  word  "well," 
in  the  first  part  of  the  verse.  It  implies  solicitude,  weari- 
ness, perseverance,  and  fixes  the  standard  of  the  work 
of  the  ministry.  The  antithesis  it  involves  is  not  between 
those  who  are  ordained  to  teach  the  Word,  and  those 
who  are  not  ordained  to  teach  it ;  nor  between  those  who 
rule,  and  those  who  teach ;  nor  between  those  who  rule 
well,  and  those  who  labor  in  the  Word,  but  either  do  not 
rule  at  all  or  do  not  rule  well ;  but  between  those  who 
toil  in  the  Word  and  doctrine,  and  those  who  do  not  toil, 
either  neglecting  it  or  falling  short  of  the  proper  activity 
in  it,  or  proving  themselves  incapable  of  doing  well  the 
work  of  religious  teachers,  or  for  any  other  reason,  not 
toiling  in  the  Word  and  doctrine. — The  whole  theory  of 


1867-75]     LAV  ELDERS  A  MODERN  INVENTION.  jgc 

lay  or  ruling  eldership  is  built  upon  two  false  emphases 
apart  from  which  the  evidence  of  other  misused  passages 
IS  too  weak  to  deserve  notice,  and  is  not  only  without 
warrant  trom  God's  Word,  but  in  direct  conflict  with  it  — 
The  theory  and  office  of  Lay  Elders  is  a  modern  m- 
VENTiON,  the  general  date  of  whose  first  assertion  is 
distmctly  marked.     The  so-called  Lay  Elders  have  no 
divme  right  to  the  title  of  Elders,  and  as  the  title  is  con- 
nected with  a  false  theory,  and  is  used  to  support  it   the 
name  ought  not  to  be  used  to  designate  a  body  of  men 
who  are  of  purely  human  creation.— Though  the  theory 
obtained  currency  mainly  through  the  influence  of  Calvin 
and  was  for  a  time  dominant  in  a  large  part  of  the  Cal- 
vinistic    Churches,    there   have   always    been    Calvinistic 
Bodies  vvhich  do  not  receive  it,  and  it  has  been  rejected  by 
many  of  the  greatest   scholars   of   that   communion- 
1  hough  the  theory  was  incautiously  adopted  by  some  of 

t^rF'^i  I'""''  ^/-'^'^  ^"'^^^""  C^^^^^J^'  y^'  't  is  in  con- 
flict with  the  teachings  of  our  Confessions,  and  of  the 
Reformers  who  prepared  them,  and  rests  on  a  dangerous 
fallacy  the  important  interest  which  it  has  often  been 
honestly  meant  to  protect.-The  term  "ruling  el- 
der IS  a  misnomer,  as,  on  the  admission  of  those  who 
use  It,  the  teaching  elders  are  also,  and  indeed  by  pre- 
eminence, ruling  Elders.  ^  ^ 

THE    PRINCIPLES    OF    CHURCH    FELLOWSHIP    IN    THE 
GENERAL  COUNCIL. 

At  the  first  convention  of  the  General  Council  in  Fort 

adop  ed  he  Constitution  and  was  ready  to  enter  into  full 
niembership  of  the  Body,  asked  that  the  General  Council 
should  expressly  acknowledge,  what  they  considered  to 
be  virtually  implied  in  its  "Fundamental  Principles  of 
Faith  and  Church   Polity."  vi.   that,  according' rth 

must  brr  d   •  '"  ^^""^^'"^^  ^"^'^^^^"  Churd.  there 

must  be  and  is  condemned,  all  church  fellowship  with 

such  as  are  not  T  ii<-liprQt-.c  ^i        i    •         "•''"P   ^viLn 

not  J^utherans the  admittance  of  those 


Iq6  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

of  a  different  faith  to  the  privilege  of  communion,  and 
into  the  pulpits  of  Lutheran  Churches. 

This  request,  made  by  the  Iowa  Synod  in  good  faith, 
and  as  a  matter  of  conscientious  conviction,  presented  a 
live  question  of  the  highest  importance,  which  kept  the 
General  Council  in  constant  agitation  for  a  number  of 
years,  led  to  the  withdrawal  of  several  Western  Synods, 
and  seriously  disturbed  the  harmonious  and  amicable  re- 
lations between  some  of  the  leaders  who  had  stood  side 
by  side  in  the  great  conflict  with  the  General  Synod,  and 
in  the  founding  of  a  new  general  Body  on  a  sound  Luth- 
eran basis.     The  struggle  for  the  maintenance  and  con- 
sistent application  of  the  correct  principles  of  pulpit  and 
altar  fellowship  was,  in  reality,  a  struggle  for  the  very 
right  of  existence  for  the  General  Council.     Those  who, 
in  the  battle  against  the  General  Synod,  had  once  stood 
up  for  the  principle,  that  the  distinctive  doctrines  of  the 
Lutheran  Confession  were  to  be  considered  as   funda- 
mental doctrines,  and  that  no  church  fellowship  could  be 
maintained  with  those  who  rejected  them,  or  refused  to 
consider  them   as    fundamental,   could   not   consistently 
demand  freedom  to  cultivate  or  tolerate  temporary  fel- 
lowship with  others  who  were  separated  from  the  com- 
munion of  the  Lutheran  Church  on  those  very  points, 
by  what  they  taught  and  believed.     Nothing  less  was  at 
stake  in  this  question,  than  the  doctrinal  basis  of  the 
General  Council  itself,  to  wit,  that  "the  true  unity  of  the 
Church  must  of  necessity  be  unity  in  doctrine  and  faith 
and  in  the  Sacraments."    (Principles  of  Faith  and  Church 
Polity.    Art.  2.) 

But  the  full  appreciation  of  this  principle  and  its  prac- 
tical application  to  the  momentous  question  of  pulpit  and 
altar  fellowship  was  of  comparatively  slow  growth  among 
the  leaders  of  the  General  Council  themselves,  not  ex- 
cepting Dr.    Krauth,   who  was  providentially  called  to 


i867.]  PULPIT  AND  ALTAR  FELLOWSHIP.  197 

give  to  this  perplexing  subject  the  fullest  and  most  thor- 
ough-going treatment,  and  to  lead  the  General  Council 
step  by  step  to  a  clearly  defined  and  consistent  position. 
In  the  different  stages  of  the  discussion  of  these  principles 
he  had  an  experience  similar  to  what  he  passed  through 
in  his  combat  with  American  Lutheranism,  when,  after 
years  of  comparative  latitudinarianism,  the  consistency 
of  logic  and  the  faithfulness  to  the  Confession  finally 
forced  him  to  the  declaration,  that  "all  articles  of  faith 
are  fundamental,  and  that  the  Church  can  never  have  a 
genuine  internal  harmony,  except  in  the  confession,  with- 
out reservation  or  ambiguity,  of  these  articles  one  and 
all.  (See  Chap.  xiii.  p.  115.)  The  adherence  to,  and 
application  of  this  principle,  was  bound  to  make  him  in 
the  end,  the  most  powerful  and  consistent  champion  of 
"Close  Communion"  the  Lutheran  Church  has  ever  had 
in  this  country  or  in  Europe.  It  brought  down  upon  him 
the  censure,  condemnation  and  estrangement  of  brethren 
whom  he  loved  and  esteemed,  and  who  considered  his  at- 
titude as  uncharitable,  intolerant  and  quite  inconsistent 
with  positions  he  had  formerly  held  and  defended.  But 
he  held  that  there  is  no  peril  greater  to  a  man's  love  of 
truth  than  a  false  pride  of  mechanical  consistency.  His 
seeming  inconsistencies  were  the  long  growth  of  ripen- 
ing consistency.  They  were  not  the  result  of  want  of  a 
fixed  principle, — the  shifting  from  principle  to  prin- 
ciple,— but  the  outgrowth  of  one  great  set  of  principles, 
maturing  and  bringing  into  more  perfect  harmony  the 
conviction  and  the  act.  From  the  hour  that,  by  God's 
grace,  through  many  a  sore  struggle  and  conflict,  he  had 
begun  to  approach  the  firm  ground,  up  to  the  present,  he 
had  moved  in  one  line.  His  present  convictions  were 
connected  by  unbroken  succession  with  those  earliest  ones. 
"The  law  of  growth  is  the  law  of  life.  The  inconsist- 
encies of  the  earnest  seeker  of  truth  are  like  the  incon- 


198  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

sistencies  of  the  oak  with  its  acorn.  There  are  changes, 
but  it  is  one  life  which  has  conditioned  them  all."  (Re- 
marks at  the  First  Diet,  Philadelphia,  1877,  p.  143.) 

The  question  of  Pulpit  and  Altar  Fellowship  was  for 
the  first  time  fully  discussed  by  the  General  Council  at 
the  Pittsburgh  Convention,  1868,  on  the  basis  of  a  Com- 
mittee report,  prepared  by  Dr.  Krauth  as  chairman.  The 
recommendations  of  this  report  which  were  unanimously 
adopted,  contain  the  following  points :  "As  regards  Ex- 
change of  pulpits,  we  hold,  i. — That  the  purity  of  the 
pulpit  should  be  guarded  with  the  most  conscientious 
care,  and  that  no  man  shall  be  admitted  to  our  pulpits, 
whether  of  the  Lutheran  name  or  any  other,  of  whom 
there  is  just  reason  to  doubt  whether  he  will  preach  the 
pure  truth  of  God's  Word  as  taught  in  the  Confessions 
of  our  Church.  2. — Lutheran  ministers  may  properly 
preach  wherever  there  is  an  opening  in  the  pulpits  of 
other  Churches,  unless  the  circumstances  imply,  or  seem 
to  imply,  fellowship  with  error  or  schism,  or  a  restriction 
on  the  unreserved  expression  of  the  whole  counsel  of 
God. — As  regards  the  Communion  with  those  not  of 
our  Church,  we  hold,  that  the  principle  of  a  discriminate, 
as  over  against  an  indiscriminate  Communion,  is  to  be 
firmly  maintained.  Heretics  and  fundamental  errorists 
are  to  be  excluded  from  the  Lord's  Table.  The  respon- 
sibility of  an  unworthy  approach  to  the  Lord's  Table 
does  not  rest  alone  upon  him  who  makes  the  approach, 
but  also  upon  him  who  invites  it." 

The  position  taken  by  Dr.  Krauth  in  the  extended  dis- 
cussion of  these  principles  clearly  shows,  that  at  the  time 
of  the  Pittsburgh  convention,  (1868)  he  was  not  ready 
to  endorse  fully  and  unreservedly  the  inferences  drawn 
by  the  Iowa  Synod,  ''that  all  church  fellowship  with  such 
as  are  not  Lutheran,.  ..  .the  admittance  of  those  of  a 
different  faith  to  the  privilege  of  communion  and  into 
the  pulpits  of  Lutheran  Churches  must  be  condemned." 


1868]  AT  THE  PITTSBURGH  CONVENTION.  199 

He  realized  the  profound  importance  of  these  questions 
as  conditioning  the  future,  not  only  of  the  Lutheran 
Church,  but  of  Protestantism  itself. 

On  the  general  question,  he  said,  there  is  no  contro- 
versy. All  pure  churches  with  a  sound  discipline,  recog- 
nize the  general  principle  of  discriminate,  over  against  in- 
discriminate communion.  This  general  principle  is  based 
on  God's  Word.  A  man  that  is  an  heretic  is  to  be  re- 
jected. Those  are  condemned  who  bring  in  damnable 
heresies.  It  grows  out  of  the  true  unity  of  the  Church 
which  is  a  unity  of  faith.  An  outward  without  an  inward 
unity  is  a  sham,  a  fraud,  an  assault  upon  the  true  unity 
of  the  Church.  The  unity  in  the  faith  is  the  condition 
of  communion.  With  the  Lutheran  Church  her  doctrine 
of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  a  fundamental  article  of  faith. 
The  question  is  not,  then,  shall  there  be  a  discrimination 
in  the  Communion  ?  In  this  all  agree.  The  Presbyterian, 
Episcopalian,  Baptist,  all  sound  church  organizations 
unite  in  such  discrimination.  The  question  is :  What 
are  the  certain  things  necessary  to  justify  such  discrimina- 
tion? There  has  ever  been  a  difference  in  the  application 
of  the  particular  and  the  Oecumenical  Confessions.  The 
Lutheran  Church  views  in  a  different  light  those  who 
differ  from  her  peculiar  Creed,  and  those  who  differ  from 
the  Apostles',  the  Nicene,  the  Athanasian  Creed.  A  Pres- 
byterian is  not  to  be  placed  on  the  same  ground  as  a  So- 
cinian.  Not  as  to  the  outer  then,  but  as  to  the  inner 
circle,  is  the  difficulty.  Shall  we,  under  all  circumstances, 
exclude  from  the  Lord's  Table  all  who  are  not  in  the 
same  external  organization  with  us?  There  are  differ- 
ences arising  from  ignorance,  not  willingly ;  through 
simplicity,  not  understandingly.  Have  we  not  met  in 
other  churches  those  who  accepted  the  faith  of  our  Luth- 
eran Church  as  that  of  the  Bible?  Miserably  un-Lutheran 
in  doctrine  are  many  who  call  themselves  Lutheran.  By 
no  external  limits  of  ecclesiastical  organization  is  this 
question  to  be  settled,  but  by  the  unity  of  the  faith. 


200  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

In  a  similar  strain  he  expressed  himself  on  the  "Ex- 
change of  Pulpits." 

All  churches  worthy  of  the  name  agree  that  there  is 
to  be  no  exchange  of  pulpits  with  Errorists.  The 
churches  around  us,  many  of  whose  members  may  think 
us  bigots,  will  find  that  their  most  prominent  teachers 
have  held  this  position.  The  practice  of  the  Apostles, 
the  practice  of  the  Church  up  to  the  Reformation,  and  of 
all  churches  since  that  time,  has  been  to  allow  no  inter- 
change of  pulpits  with  errorists.  This  is  not  a  mere  mat- 
ter of  opinion,  or  social  refinement,  or  courtesy,  but  it  is 
a  question  deep,  broad  and  vital.  The  pulpit  is  the  great 
guard  of  purity  of  doctrine.  The  Gospel  as  preached  is 
the  power  of  God.  A  pure  pulpit  makes  a  pure  church ; 
a  confused  pulpit  a  confused  church.  Loose  views  on 
this  subject  tend  to  moral  skepticism.  To  this  nothing 
is  more  favorable  than  the  idea  that  the  churches  are  all 
right ;  that  truth  has  been  torn  into  fragments,  and  here 
we  find  a  toe,  there  an  ear,  in  another  place  a  hand.  This 
is  one  of  the  worst  tendencies  of  the  Union-speculations 
of  the  present  day,  and  is  to  a  great  extent,  caused  by 
this  business  of  pulpit-exchange.  The  distinctive  doc- 
trines of  the  Lutheran  Church  are  important.  We  hold 
doctrines  opposed  to  the  general  tendency  of  the  Amer- 
ican mind.  We  have  therefore  a  peculiar  difficulty  in 
holding  our  people  fast  to  the  pure  doctrines  which  we 
confess,  and  have  confessed,  some  of  them  almost  against 
the  world.  Looseness  on  this  point  weakens  the  ground 
on  which  we  make  a  test  of  candidates  for  our  Ministry. 

Our  position  may  be  summed  up  as  follows:  i. — \Ye 
all  agree  that  a  man  who  holds  doctrinal  views  contrary 
to  the  Oecumenical  Creeds  should  be  excluded  from  our 
pulpits.  2. — We  are  all  agreed  in  this :  A  Lutheran  min- 
ister may  preach  wherever  there  is  an  opening,  unless 
there  be  something  to  show  fellowship  with  error  or  to 
restrict  his  preaching-  the  Gospel  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  3. — All  are  agreed  in  this :  Sects  which  have 
arisen  from  factious  subdivisions  are  not  to  be  placed 


i868.]  THE  INTERCHANGE  OF  PULPITS.  20 1 

on  the  same  level  with  the  churches  from  which  they 
have  sprung.  God  forbid  that  we  should  place  the  Re- 
formed Church  upon  a  level  with  the  Campbellites  and 
other  factious  schismatics.  4. — /\11  are  agreed  that  no 
man  should  be  admitted  to  our  pulpits,  whether  he  bear 
the  name  of  Lutheran  or  not,  who  does  not  preach  the 
true  Word  of  God.  5. — On  the  interchange  of  pulpits 
we  must  exercise  the  extremest  care,  and  hence  no  Synod 
should  be  condemned  which  positively  restricts  its  pulpits 
to  those  who  are  Lutheran.  We  see  clearly  that,  if  we 
could  draw  that  sharp  line,  it  would  simplify  the  ques- 
tion. 6. — Other  ministers  holding  to  the  Confessions 
of  the  Church  Universal,  and  affording  evidence  that  they 
will  preach  the  truth  of  God's  Word  as  our  Church  con- 
fesses it.  should  not  be  excluded.  There  always  have 
been,  out  of  our  Church,  those  who  have  held  to  the  faith 
of  the  Church.  Martin  Luther,  when  he  began  the  Re- 
formation, was  pure  in  the  truths  of  the  Holy  Word. 
If  there  were  a  Romish  Priest  now,  whose  circumstances 
were  similar,  although  still  under  the  sway  of  Rome.  I 
believe,  that  I  would  be  doing  nothing  wrong  to  admit 
him  into  my  pulpit  to  preach  the  doctrine  of  justification 
by  faith.  .  .  .If  then  in  that  corrupt  church  this  is  true, 
can  we  not  find  in  the  churches  wliich  have  fought  with 
us  against  the  common  enemy,  for  Protestantism  over 
against  Rome,  for  the  sufficiency  of  Scripture  over 
against  its  insufficiency,  for  justification  by  faith  over 
against  justification  by  works, — can  we  not  find  those 
whom  we  can  in\ite  into  our  pulpits?  We  must  make  a 
difference  between  those  who  differ  with  us  on  the  essen- 
tial Christianity,  and  those  who  agree  with  us  on  those 
precious  truths  which  rise  above  all  distinctions.  Our 
Brethren  may  think  us  deficient  in  logical  consistency, 
but  they  will  do  justice  to  our  Christian  hearts.  There 
are  so  many  not  of  us,  yet  so  dear  to  us,  that  we  cannot 
say:  You  shall  not  enter  our  pulpits. 

Dr.  Krauth  was  evidently  aware  of  the  unsatisfactory 
•character, — the  "logical  inconsistency" — of  his  position 


202  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

at  that  time.  The  distinction  between  those  who  differ 
from  "the  particular  confessions"  of  the  Lutheran 
Church,  and  "those  who  differ  from  the  Oecumenical 
Confessions,  the  Apostles',  the  Nicene  and  the  Athanasian 
Creed,"  was  irrelevant  and  untenable  in  the  consideration 
of  this  question  of  pulpit  and  altar  fellowship,  because 
it  ignored  the  fundamental  character  of  the  "distinctive" 
doctrines  of  the  Lutheran  Confession,  and  would  have 
opened  the  door  to  Romanists  as  adherents  of  the 
Oecumenical  Creeds.  And  the  sentimental  appeal  to  the 
"Christian  heart"  in  the  case  of  those  who  err  "from 
ignorance,  not  willingly,  through  simplicity,  not  under- 
standingly,"  was  hardly  in  place,  where  a  confessional 
principle  was  at  stake.  Dr.  Krauth,  even  at  that  time, 
saw  clearly,  that  the  question  would  be  settled  in  the 
simplest  way,  if  the  definite  confessional  line  could  be 
sharply  drawn.  But  he  was  not  yet  prepared  for  that. 
Even  two  years  later,  at  the  convention  in  Lancaster,  O., 
(1870)  he  still  stood  by  the  same  position.  The  Pitts- 
burgh declarations  had  not  been  satisfactory  to  the  West- 
ern Synods.  The  Synod  of  Wisconsin  withdrew  from 
the  General  Council.  And  at  the  Chicago  convention 
(1869)  the  Minnesota  Synod  re-opened  the  question, 
asking,  whether  the  right  interpretation  of  the  General 
Council's  testimony  was  this:  i. — That  heretics  and 
fundamental  errorists  cannot  be  admitted  to  our  altars 
as  communicants,  nor  into  our  pulpits  as  teachers  of  our 
congregations?  2. — Since  the  so-called  distinctive  doc- 
trines of  the  Lutheran  Church  are  fundamental,  whether 
the  General  Council  understood  by  "fundamental  er- 
rorists" those  who,  with  regard  to  these  distinctive  doc- 
trines, are  not  in  harmony  with  the  pure  Word  of  God 
as  it  is  confessed  and  taught  in  our  Church? 

A  Committee,  consisting  of  Drs.  Seiss,  (Chairman) 
Krauth  and  C.  W.  Schaeffer,  was  charged  with  the  pre- 
paration of  an  answer  to  the  "Minnesota  Question."    Dr_ 


i87o.]  THE  "MINNESOTA   QUESTION."  203 

Krauth  had  conferred  with  the  chairman  of  the  Commit- 
tee. He  had  himself  prepared  a  very  full  statement  on 
the  subject,  which  is  still  extant  among  his  papers.  Part 
of  the  draft  of  an  answer,  proposed  by  Dr.  Seiss,  had 
been  submitted  to  Dr.  Krauth.  But,  unfortunately,  un- 
der the  impression,  that  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee 
was  in  essential  accord  with  his  own  views  on  this  point, 
Dr.  Krauth  had  not  examined  the  full  report  in  its  final 
form,  in  which  it  was  submitted  to  the  convention  in  Lan- 
caster (1870),  as  he  himself  frankly  confessed  in  the 
course  of  the  debate.  Thus  it  happened  that  his  name 
appeared  under  a  definition  of  the  term  "fundamental  er- 
rorists,"  as  those  "who  err  from  the  common  Christian 
faith  as  embodied  in  the  three  general  Creeds," — a  defini- 
tion, which  did  not  represent  Dr.  Krauth's  views,  and 
which  was  so  unsatisfactory  to  the  General  Council,  that 
tlie  report  was  referred  back  to  the  Committee  "with  in- 
structions to  make  certain  alterations."  (See  Minutes  of 
Fourth  Convention  G.  C.  p.  27.)  But,  after  all,  the  final 
action  of  the  General  Council  at  Lancaster  (1870)  ex- 
pressly stated,  that  the  term  "fundamental  errorists"  in 
the  Pittsburgh  declaration  did  not  include  "those  who  are 
the  victims  of  involuntary  mistake,  but  those  who  wil- 
fully, wickedly  and  persistently  desert,  in  whole  or  in 
part,  the  Christian  faith,  especially  as  embodied  in  the 
Confessions  of  the  Church  Catholic,  in  the  purest  form 
in  which  it  now  exists  on  earth,  to  wit :  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church,  and  thus  overturn  or  destroy  the  foun- 
dation in  them  confessed;  and  who  hold,  defend  and  ex- 
tend these  errors  in  the  face  of  the  admonitions  of  the 
Church,  and  to  the  leading  away  of  men  from  the  path 
of  life."  In  consequence  of  this  action  the  Synods  of 
Illinois  and  Minnesota  withdrew  from  the  General  Coun- 
cil. No  final  settlement  of  the  question  had  been  reached 
by  this  declaration.  It  still  did  not  touch  the  main  issue. 
It  dealt  with  the  whole  problem,  however  earnestly  and 


204  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

sincerely,  as  belonging  to  the  sphere  of  pastoral  rules  and 
regulations,  and  not  as  a  fundamental  principle  of  faith 
and  confession. 

But  only  one  year  afterward,  during  the  Rochester 
convention  (1871)  Dr.  Krauth  declared,  in  private  con- 
versation, his  sincere  conviction,  that  the  position  of  the 
Iowa  Synod  on  the  question  of  church  fellowship  was 
the  only  correct  and  consistent  one,  and  that  this  whole 
matter  would  not  be  settled  in  the  General  Council,  until 
it  had  reached  the  same  position. 

At  the  Akron  convention  (1872)  the  Iowa  Synod, 
through  its  delegate.  Dr.  Sigmund  Fritschel,  renewed  its 
request  for  a  definite  answer  to  the  mooted  question. 
What  it  desired  was  "not  the  mere  pastoral  advice  how 
to  act  in  certain  difficult  cases,  but  the  establishment  of 
the  confessional  principle."  The  General  Council  was 
asked,  that  certain  verbal  declarations  of  its  President, 
(Dr.  Krauth)  "in  which  the  confessional  principle  was 
clearly  and  unequivocally  expressed,"  be  adopted  by  the 
Body  as  its  own  official  statement.  By  request  the  Presi- 
dent reduced  those  statements  to  writing,  and  they  were 
formally  adopted  as  the  sense  of  the  Lancaster  declara- 
tions, to  wit:  I. — The  rule  is:  Lutheran  pulpits  for 
Lutheran  ministers  only.  Lutheran  Altars  for  Lutheran 
communicants  only.  2. — The  Exceptions  to  the  Rule  be- 
long to  the  sphere  of  privilege,  not  of  right.  3. — The  de- 
termination of  the  exceptions  is  to  be  made  in  consonance 
with  these  principles,  by  the  conscientious  judgment  of 
pastors  as  the  cases  arise.  (Sixth  Convention  G.  C. 
Minutes  p.  47.) 

A  climax  was  reached  in  the  discussion  of  the  Church 
Fellowship  problem  at  the  ninth  convention  of  the  Gen- 
eral Council,  in  Galesburg,  Illinois,  1875.  In  the  month 
of  June,  of  the  same  year,  the  Swedish  Augustana  Synod 
had  taken  action  on  the  subject  of  "Mixed  Communion," 
and  had  adopted  the  following  declarations :  "Fellowship 


i875.]  THE   GALES  BURG   RULE.  205 

in  the  Supper  with  those  who  have  and  hold  a  doctrine 
(hfferino-  from  our  Confession,  especially  relative  to  the 
Lord's  Supper,  is,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  a  denial  of 
our  own  faith  and  confession,  and  is  making  little  account 
of  the  Supper  itself. — No  others,  therefore,  ought  to  be 
allowed  to  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper  within  the 
Church,  than  those  who  belong  to  the  Church  or  have 
the  same  faith  and  confession  with  our  Church."  Fol- 
lowing up  this  action  of  one  of  the  largest  and  most  in- 
fluential bodies  in  connection  with  the  General  Council, 
Dr.  Justus  Ruperti,  pastor  of  the  German  St.  Matthew's 
Church  in  New  York  City,  gave  notice  in  the  first  session 
of  the  Galesburg  convention  of  the  General  Council,  that 
he  would  submit  propositions  for  the  consideration  of 
the  subject  of  Pulpit  and  Altar  Fellowship.  This  led 
to  the  adoption  of  the  famous  "Galesburg  Rule/'  passed 
in  the  sixth  session.  October  11,  1875,  as  follows: 

"The  General  Council  expresses  its  sincere  gratifica- 
tion at  the  progress  of  a  true  Lutheran  practice  in  the 
different  Lutheran  Synods,  since  its  action  on  communion 
and  exchange  of  pulpits  with  those  not  of  our  Church, 
as  well  as  at  the  clear  testimony  in  reference  to  these 
subjects  officially  expressed  by  the  Augustana  Synod  at 
its  convention  in  1875  ;  nevertheless  we  hereby  renewedly 
call  the  attention  of  our  pastors  and  churches  to  the 
principles  involved  in  that  testimony,  in  the  earnest  hope 
that  our  practice  may  be  conformed  to  our  united  and 
deliberate  testimony  on  this  subject,  viz..  the  rule,  which 
accords  with  the  Word  of  God  and  with  the  Confessions 
of  our  Church,  is:  Lutheran  pulpits  for  Lutheran  min- 
isters only — Lutheran  altars  for  Lutheran  communicants 
only."  (Ninth  Convent.  G.  C.  Minutes,  p.  17.)  In  re- 
gard to  this  action  the  President.  Dr.  Krauth,  made  an 
official  declaration  to  this  effect:  'The  sole  change  in 
this  action  is,  it  declares  whence  we  get  the  rule,  to  wit, 
out  of  the  Word  of  God  and  the  Confessions  of  our 


2o6  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

Church.  It  only  makes  expHcit,  what  was  impHed  before. 
And  in  the  practical  application  of  it,  all  pretence  that 
the  rule  is  only  a  human  rule,  or  rule  of  order,  is  pre- 
cluded." 

This  action  of  the  General  Council  stirred  up  the  great- 
est excitement,  particularly  among  the  English  pastors 
and  congregations  of  the  Body.  Dr.  J.  A.  Kunkleman, 
pastor  of  St.  Mark's  English  Lutheran  Church,  Philadel- 
phia, addressed  a  note  to  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary 
(October  i8,  1875)  in  which  he  asked  :  i.— Is  the  report  of 
the  Council's  action  correct?  2. — Where  does  the  Word 
of  God,  and  where  does  the  Confession  of  the  Church 
give  the  rule :  Lutheran  Pulpits  for  Lutheran  Ministers 
only ;  Lutheran  Altars  for  Lutheran  Communicants  only  ? 

Dr.  G.  F.  Krotel,  the  writer  of  the  "Insulanus"  letters 
in  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  in  a  letter  to  Dr.  Krauth 
of  October  19,  1875,  applied  "to  headquarters  for  in- 
formation concerning  the  Galesburg  action,  inasmuch  as 
it  was  evidently  understood  in  two  different  ways,  the 
one  party  believing  that  the  position  contended  for  from 
the  beginning  has  been  abandoned  in  favor  of  the  strict- 
est view  and  practice,  while  others  were  under  the  im- 
pression that  the  resolutions  adopted  at  Akron  remain 
unaltered." 

Two  days  after  Dr.  Kunkleman's  questions  had 
appeared  in  the  Lutheran,  the  Editor-in-Chief,  Dr.  J.  A. 
Seiss,  addressed  the  following  note  to  Dr.  Krauth : 

October  30,   1875. 

Dear  Bro. — There  is  considerable  feeling  generating 
among  some  of  our  clergy  of  the  General  Council  re- 
specting the  late  pronouncement  of  that  Body  on  the 
"Rule"  concerning  Lutheran  Pulpits  and  Altars.  You 
know  there  has  been  no  difference  among  us  as  to  the  Rule 
in  general,  the  whole  controversy  having  been  on  the 
legitimacy,    under   the    Scriptures   and    Confessions,    of 


I 


I875-]  EXPLANATION  DEMANDED.  207 

"Exceptions."  situated  as  we  are  in  these  weak  and  dis- 
ordered times. 

The  face  of  tiie  late  action  would  seem  to  repeal  or 
supersede  all  previous  utterances  with  regard  to  such 
exceptions.  It  makes  the  "Rule"  to  be  the  teaching  and 
requirement  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  Confessions, 
and  as  there  can  be  no  exceptions  to  such  a  rule,  many 
feel,  that  what  we  (including  yourself)  have  been  insist- 
ing on  in  this  matter,  has  been  summarily  cast  overboard, 
and  that  we  are  now  in  loyalty  expected  to  accept  and  en- 
force a  "Rule"  as  absolute,  divine  and  essential,  which, 
as  it  stands  without  qualification,  is  neither  in  the 
Scriptures  nor  in  the  Confessions  of  our  Church. 

In  his  answer  to  this  letter,  dated  November  3.  1875, 
Dr.  Krauth  said  : 

No  part  of  the  affirmation  at  Akron  is  intended  as  be- 
ing withdrawn.  The  rule  is  simply  defined  as  to  its 
source,  and  that  source,  I  always  meant,  and  supposed 
the  Council  to  mean,  "accords  with  God's  Word  and  the 
Confession."  Those  who  regarded  it  as  a  new  rule  of 
order  will,  of  course,  find  their  relation  to  it  changed, 
but  no  others  will.  If  you  will  give  me  a  little  time,  and 
keep  out  of  the  papers  all  unauthorized  statements  of 
facts  and  arguments  from  men,  of  whom,  I  suppose, 
there  are  a  number  anxious  to  rush  into  print,  I  shall  be 
happy  to  take  up  Bro.  Kunkleman's  letter  and  reply  to  it. 

As  the  Doctor  did  take  "a  little  time"  before  he  was 
ready  to  commit  himself  to  print,  Dr.  Seiss  grew  some- 
what impatient  and  urged  an  immediate  answer  in  a 
note  of  November  22,  1875,  in  which  he  says:  "You  who 
are  not  pastors,  nor  in  direct  contact  with  the  people,  may 
not  feel  it.  but  the  trouble  is  rising.  Our  paper  must 
speak.  I  must  give  answer  to  the  pressure  which  is  more 
strongly  alienating  some  of  our  best  ministers  and  men 
from  the  General  Council,  than  anything  that  has  oc- 
curred. Unless  some  speedy  and  satisfactory  explanation 
is  given  of  the  impression  that  has  been  made,  I  will  be 


208  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV- 

compelled  to  go  with  these  people.     Please  clear  the  mat- 
ter up  without  further  delay." 

This  was  followed  by  another  note  of  December  4, 
1875,  in  which  Dr.  Seiss  says  : 

I  am  glad  that  you  will  write  now.  We  lost  immensely 
by  the  delay.  Friends  have  turned  away  from  my 
church,  relinquished  their  purpose  to  take  pews,  have 
said  they  will  never  enter  it  again,  because  of  the  impres- 
sions everywhere  being  put  against  us,  by  reason  of  the 
unfortunate  touching  of  this  fellowship-question.  It  is 
simply  impossible  to  maintain  ourselves  on  the  Missouri 
ground.  It  will  take  the  Indiana,  and  Ohio,  and  Holston 
Synods  out  of  the  Council  at  once.  It  will  split  the  Pitts- 
burgh Synod  and  our  own.  Our  men  in  the  principal 
English  churches  cannot  endure  to  stand  under  it.  Right 
or  wrong,  the  facts  are  stronger  than  the  logic.  The 
education  of  a  hundred  years  cannot  be  legislated  out  by 
the  crude  utterance  of  a  moment. 

Thus  far  our  people  have  consented  to  follow  us,  not 
their  feelings  and  convictions  in  the  matter.  The  tide 
has  now  turned  the  other  way,  and  it  will  dash  all  our 
English  interests  into  speedy  disaster  if  not  utter  ruin, 
unless  a  strong  breakwater  be  thrown  up.  No  mere 
placebos  will  answer  now. 

I  have  an  idea  that  you  have  not  half  taken  in  as  true, 
what  I  have  stated  to  you,  or  you  would  not  have  dealt 
with  me  in  the  case  in  a  way  which  will  bear  the  con- 
struction of  indifference,  if  not  trifling.  This  I  was 
made  to  feel  keenly  when  no  response  came  to  my  last 
urgent  note  of  Monday  morning,  November  22d,  after 
having  waited  weeks  beyond  the  time  you  had  named. 
I  could  not,  dared  not,  and  therefore,  did  not  allow  the 
matter  to  hang  any  longer,  not  knowing  when  you  would 
speak,  or  what.  The  statements  as  to  the  state  and 
course  of  things  were  not  the  fabrication  of  my  own 
imagination,  but  with  solid  information  from  all  parts 
of  the  Church  with  reference  to  it,  and  results  threatened. 


i875]  THE  EXPLANATION  GIVEN.  209 

You  may  not  believe  that  things  are  as  serious  as  they  are ; 
but  better  believe  it  now  than  find  it  out  when  it  is  too 
late. 

Hoping  that  your  proposed  article  may  have  the  effect 
of  helping  to  save  us  from  the  perils  which  have  so  un- 
necessarily, and  without  occasion,  been  precipitated  upon 
us  and  our  English  churches  especially,  I  shall  await  its 
coming  with  great  interest. 

In  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary  of  December  16,  1875, 
Dr.  Krauth  published  the  First  Article  on  the  Purity  of 
the  Pulpit  and  the  Sanctity  of  the  Altar,  from  which  we 
give  the  following  main  points : 

No  action  of  the  General  Council  seems  to  have  excited 
more  interest  than  this.  The  sectarianism  of  the  country, 
true  to  the  instinct  of  self-preservation,  has  pronounced 
against  it,  without  qualification.  Many  thoughtful  and 
conscientious  men  have  expressed  their  strong  approval 
of  it.  Others,  no  less  conscientious  and  thoughtful,  are 
perplexed,  from  an  imperfect  acquaintance  with  its  mean- 
ing, or  with  its  grounds,  and  ask  for  more  light  upon 

it As  one  who  as  chairman,  or  member,  has  served 

on  every  Committee  to  whose  hands  the  questions  touch- 
ing the  purity  of  the  pulpit  and  the  sanctity  of  the  Altar, 
have  been  entrusted  by  the  Council,  as  one  who  was  pres- 
ent at  its  last  sessions  and  who  thus  has  an  essential  pre- 
requisite to  a  full  comprehension  of  the  spirit  of  the  action, 
and  who,  when  called  on,  in  the  debate,  asserted  the  pro- 
priety of  the  action,  approved  it  then,  and  approves  it 
now,  the  writer  feels  that  the  demand  made  from  many 
sources  that  he  should  reply  to  these  questions  is  not  un- 
reasonable. 

Confessing  as  he  did  at  Pittsburgh,  in  the  first  of  the 
debates  in  the  Body  that  "the  logic  and  the  history  of 
the  case"  were  with  the  practice  which  he  could  not  then 
endorse,  he  has  come  to  see  that  the  true  character  of 
Christian  love  makes  the  same  requisition  with  the  logic 
and  history;  and  that  all  conspire  with  the  authority  of 
14 


210  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

God's  Word,  and  the  witness  of  the  purest  confession  of 
the  Church  in  estabHshing  the  rule  accepted  at  Akron, 
and  affirmed  in  a  completer  shape  at  Galesburg.  To  cor- 
rect the  misapprehension  of  which  we  have  spoken,  and 
others,  we  propose  to  explain  the  action  of  the  Council. 
If  after  the  explanation,  it  shall  be  deemed  necessary,  we 

may  defend  it 

The  declaration  at  Galesburg  is  in  fact  in  the  harmony 
of  a  consistent  maturing,  with  all  the  previous  positive 
action  of  the  General  Council.  It  contradicts  none  of 
it;  it  completes  it  all.  That  action  has  not  only  always 
wisely  avoided  the  foreclosing  in  any  way  of  the  pos- 
sibility of  growth,  but  has  throughout  assumed  the  neces- 
sity of  growth.  The  universal  feeling  has  been  that  the 
condition  of  things  was  largely  provisional.  The  self- 
educating  power  of  the  Body  had  been  so  marked  that 
no  one  could  believe  that  its  limits  had  been  reached. 
Throughout  its  whole  growth  on  the  questions  which  in- 
volve the  purity  of  the  Pulpit  and  the  sanctity  of  the 
Altar,  it  never  pretended  or  desired  to  preclude  the  most 
rigid  disciplinary  practice  on  the  part  of  those  who  be- 
lieved that  the  principle  acknowledged  in  the  earliest  ac- 
tion of  the  Council  demanded  such  a  practice,  or  made 
it  the  safer  mode.  Any  one  who  will  read  the  action 
unanimously  adopted  in  Pittsburgh  will  see,  that  it  is  ex- 
tremely difficult, — to  us  it  seems  impossible — to  accord 
with  it  practically  under  a  rule  short  of  that  involved  at 
Lancaster,  affirmed  at  Akron,  and  re-affirmed  at  Gales- 
burg. The  latest  is  but  the  riper  affirmation  of  principle 
involved  and  acknowledged  from  the  beginning,  the  more 
solid  basis  of  a  discipline  recognizing  a  rule,  which  can 
only  be  a  rule  to  a  true  Lutheran  as  he  shall  be  convinced 
that  it  accords  with  God's  Word,  and  with  the  confessions 
of  His  pure  Church.  It  is  an  adult  utterance,  valuable 
in  itself,  and  yet  more  in  the  spirit  of  the  discussion  which 
it  elicited,  and  the  harmony  of  views  it  demonstrated. 
The  rule  and  the  manner  of  its  utterance  showed  a  clear- 
ing away  of  misapprehension  and  of  half-conviction,  an 
intelligent  and  solemn  fixedness  of  purpose,  which  made 


I 


I87S-6.]  "A  STORM  OF  SENSELESSNESS"  211 

all  present  realize  what  a  power  for  good  the  General 
Council  has  been,  and  how  necessary  it  is  for  the  Church. 
The  General  Council  has  shown  throughout  a  spirit  of 
searching,  patience,  gentleness  and  openness,  which  carry 
the  promise  of  a  great  future. 

Through  private  correspondence  Dr.  Krauth  asked  the 
chairmen  of  the  different  Synodical  delegations  of  the 
Galesburg  convention  for  their  opinion  and  judgment, 
on  his  statement  in  the  Lutheran,  December  16.  They 
unanimously  approved  of  his  statement  as  correct,  and 
essentially  also  of  the  spirit  of  his  explanation.  But  the 
Editor  of  the  Lutheran  was  not  so  well  pleased  with  it. 
"The  matter,"  he  said,  "needs  much  more  thorough 
examination  and  closeness  of  thinking  than  has  yet  been 
given  it  in  any  of  the  discussions  that  have  been  had, 
and  we  propose  now  to  open  our  columns  for  that  exam- 
ination, using,  of  course,  our  editorial  prerogative  with 
regard  to  any  article  that  may  be  offered."  (December 
23,  1875.)  And  a  few  weeks  afterward,  the  Lutheran 
said  editorially  of  Dr.  Krauth's  paper :  "Having  de- 
layed so  long,  and  then,  w'ith  so  much  deliberation,  hav- 
ing tied  up  his  testimony  with  various  statements  and 
arguments,  modifying  and  dulling  the  whole  edge  of  it 
as  against  absolute  exclusivism.  his  article  has  had  the 
misfortune  not  to  satisfy  either  side,  but  to  excite  and 
intensify  the  feelings  on  both  sides."  (January  13, 
1876.)  A  perfect  flood  of  communications  on  the  mooted 
question  swept  over  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary  in  those 
months.  Well  might  the  Editor,  who  had  himself  in- 
vited them,  say  with  Goethe's  Zauberlehrling:  "Die  ich 
rief  die  Geister  li'erd  ich  nimmer  los!"*  Dr.  Krauth  com- 
forted himself  and  his  friends:  'T  think,  the  very  fury 
of  this  storm  of  senselessness  will  make  it  pass  away  the 
sooner.     It  will  grow  feebler  every  hour  when  the  reac- 

*  I  cannot  get  rid  of  the  spirits  I  called. 


212  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

tion  begins.  Partisanship  is  great  in  a  short  race,  but 
principle  prevails  in  the  long  run." 

In  order  to  make  the  situation  in  those  days  of  violent 
conflict  fully  understood  by  our  readers,  it  will  be  neces- 
sary to  give  them  a  few  specimens  of  the  communica- 
tions which  the  editor  of  the  Lutheran  admitted,  as  re- 
presenting a  "much  more  thorough  examination  and 
closeness  of  thinking,"  and  which  Dr.  Krauth,  rather 
mildly,  characterized  as  "a  storm  of  senselessness." 

Dr.  Reuben  Hill,  a  man  prominent  in  the  councils  of 
the  Church,  who  had  served  the  first  English  Lutheran 
Church  in  Pittsburgh  as  Dr.  Krauth's  successor  (1860- 
1866)  saw  in  the  action  of  the  General  Council  nothing 
but  an  unwarranted  assumption  of  hierarchical  power, 
such  as  the  Vatican  had  claimed,  and  Protestantism  had 
resisted  and  defeated  in  past  times. 

Suppose  we  put  the  same  power  which  has  been  taken 
from  the  Pope  and  his  College  of  cardinals  into  the  hands 
of  other  men,  what  have  we  gained,  and  what  is  all  our 
boasted  freedom  worth?  If  we  create  a  council  of  men 
with  power,  from  time  to  time,  to  issue  decrees  and 
establish  rules,  and  send  them  down  to  us  to  obey,  un- 
der pain  of  condemnation  by  the  Word  of  God  and  the 
Symbolical  Books,  what  have  we  gained  by  becoming 
Protestants?  We  were  required  before  the  Reformation 
to  do  nothing  more  than  to  put  our  judgment  and 
conscience  in  the  keeping  of  other  men,  and  that  is  what 
is  demanded  of  us  here.  If  we  have  close  communion 
and  an  exclusive  pulpit  this  year,  we  may  have  the  secret 
society  dogma  next  year,  and  a  mandate  on  usury  the 
next ;  then  a  law  on  wine  or  one  regulating  meat  on  Fri- 
day and  other  days;  then  the  number  of  buttons  on  the 
shirt,  and  the  length  of  the  coat-tail.  Why  not?  Such 
things  have  been  done  by  men  heretofore,  and  men  are 
still  made  of  the  same  material.  The  main  objection  to 
the  late  action  of  the  General  Council  does  not  lie  so 


1875-6.]  DOIVX   WITH   THE  FOREIGNERS!  213 

much  against  the  matter  as  the  manner  of  it.  It  is  against 
the  right  to  create  new  dogmas  and  impose  them  upon 
the  Church,  that  the  latter  ought  to  enter  its  unaherable 
protest.  And  this  the  Churches  of  the  General  Council 
must  do ;  otherwise  they  will  stand  aside  from  the  "Fun- 
damental Principles"  on  which  they  agreed  to  establish 
it.  For,  aside  from  the  Bible,  they  know  no  authority 
but  the  Augsburg  Confession.  "What  it  leaves  to  the 
freedom  of  the  Church,  of  right  belongs  to  that  freedom." 
And  if  our  Churches  suffer  it  to  be  taken  away,  they  show 
themselves  to  be  unworthy  descendants  of  illustrious 
sires,  they  betray  the  holy  trust  that  has  been  committed 
to  them,  and  deserve  the  ignominious  destiny  that  awaits 
them. 

Dr.  S.  L.  Harkey  who,  in  the  year  1884  and  1885,  held 
the  position  of  English  Recording  Secretary  of  the  Gen- 
eral Council,  protested  most  violently  on  the  same 
grounds,  and  raised  the  flag  of  the  wildest  nativism 
against  the  foreigners  from  Europe  who  threatened  ruin 
to  the  Lutheran  Church  in  America. 

It  remains  to  be  seen  whether  the  General  Council  will 
attempt  a  hierarchical  enforcement  of  its  law  upon  free 
churches  and  free  people;  or  whether  those  congrega- 
tions in  their  sovereign  capacity,  out  of  whom  all  power 
arises,  will  say  to  the  Council.  "Wait,  till  you  are  author- 
ized by  us  to  make  such  a  law  for  us."  The  attempt  of 
forty  or  fifty  men,  clerical  and  lay,  to  legislate  for  the 
consciences  of  500,000  communicants,  without  consult- 
ing them,  is  the  grandest  presumption  that  has  been  wit- 
nessed on  this  continent.  .  .  .We  have  been  reading  the 
Bible  and  the  Confessions  of  the  Church  for  more  than 
forty  years,  and  do  not  need  the  help  of  any  European 
Doctor  of  Divinity  or  Philosophy,  to  tell  us  what  they 
teach.  We  propose  to  do  our  own  reading  and  thinking 
and  acting;  and  even  if  all  Europe  should  come  and 
ridicule  our  ignorance,  or  threaten  us  with  violence.  It 
is  true,  however,  that  we  have  some  Americans,  who  all 
along  in  this   controversy   have  acted   as   suppliant   de- 


214  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

pendents  upon  our  foreign  dictators,  conceding  that  they 
were  right  in  their  demands,  asking  only  for  a  Httle 
more  time;  and  piteously  exclaiming,  "Have  patience  with 
us,  and  we  will  pay  you  all;"  but  happily,  we  think,  they 
are  in  the  minority.      (February  3,  1876.) 

In  another  communication  the  same  writer,  with 
Luther  and  Webster  as  his  authorities,  proves  triumph- 
antly, that  the  principle  contended  for  by  Dr.  Krauth 
is  against  the  whole  spirit  and  language  of  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  more  particularly  the  "Communion  of  Saints"  in 
the  third  Article. 

"The  Communion  of  Saints"  in  the  Apostles'  Creed 
requires  all  Christians  to  regard  each  other  as  upon  a 
perfect  equality,  jointly  entitled  to  a  participation  in  all 
the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  children  of  God  every- 
where, under  all  circumstances,  and  in  all  times.  Abso- 
lutely nothing  can  be  claimed  by  one,  which  is  not  the 
lawful  inheritance  of  all.  And  it  is  impossible  to  intro- 
duce invidious  distinctions  among  that  class  of  persons 
here  designated,  being  all  true  children  of  God  upon 
earth. 

Unfortunately  there  were  not  a  few  utterances,  even  in 
the  editorial  columns  of  the  Luthcj'an  in  those  days,  which 
seemed  to  indicate  that  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss  himself  was 
strongly  leaning  toward  the  position  taken  by  these 
radicals.  He  charges  against  the  Confessional  position, 
that  "it  involves  a  polemic  scholasticism,  and  exaggerated 
distinctivism,  and  an  obscuration  of  the  sacred  lines  of 
difference  between  the  relative  worth  of  doctrines,  and 
remote  details  and  fractions  of  doctrines,  which  has 
yielded  our  Church  many  apples  of  Sodom  in  the 
centuries  past,  and  which,  if  given  sway  again,  would 
bring  like  fruits,  disable  the  Council,  alienate  and  scatter 
its  people,  and  dwarf  its  being,  if  not  utterly  destroy 
the  best  hopes  of  our  Church  in  this  country.  At  the 
very  least  it  would  be  a  great  unwisdom  to  revive  the 


1876.]  A  LETTER  FROM  OLYMPUS.  215 

ruinous  scholasticism  of  the  seventeenth  century,  as  the 
proper  thing  for  the  Lutheran  Church  in  America.  .  .  . 
One  'Thus  saith  the  Lord,'  and  one  single  word  of 
Scripture,  is  enough  to  set  aside  all  the  logical  conclusions 
in  the  world.  And  if  the  question  under  discussion  be 
one  of  mere  logical  deduction,  we  only  bring  ourselves 
and  the  Church  in  peril  by  submitting  to  be  governed 
by  it  as  a  divine  requirement.  It  is  here  that  the  Apos- 
tolic monition  applies,  '  Beware  lest  any  man  spoil  you 
through  philosophy  and  vain  deceit,  after  the  tradition 
of  men,  after  the  rudiments  of  the  world  and  not  after 
Christ.'  "  (Col.  ii.  8.)  In  the  editorial  of  October  12, 
1876,  just  before  the  Convention  in  Bethlehem  met,  the 
Editor  of  the  Lutheran  made  bold  to  say:  "The  Gales- 
burg  Rule  is  simply  a  myth,  a  fable.  There  is  no  such 
rule."  (!!) 

A  refreshing  oasis  in  the  wilderness  of  those  barren 
disputations  was  a  contribution  from  the  pen  of  Dr. 
Krauth's  daughter,  which  was  admitted  into  the  Luth- 
eran, though  it  contained,  in  exquisite  satire,  a  scathing 
exposure  of  the  shallow  Unionism  that  was  on  the  ram- 
page. In  a  "Letter  from  Olympus"  (February  5,  1876) 
the  following  picture  was  drawn  of  the  ideal  "Union- 
Church"  : 

We  had  material  for  one  strong  congregation.  We 
resolved  to  have  a  church  that  would  satisfy  all  its  mem- 
bers. The  Rev.  Felix  Medium  announced  that  he  would 
preach  any  doctrine  required,  would  be  "all  things  to  all 
men,"  but  would  like  to  retain  the  ritual  of  his  sect. 
Whereupon  the  Vice-President  sniffed  and  called  him  a 
Papist,  and  the  Rev.  Felix  withdrew  his  proposition  un- 
der cover  of  the  text,  "If  any  man  take  away  thy  coat, 
let  him  have  thy  cloak  also."  Soon  afterwards  a  meeting 
was  held  to  establish  the  doctrinal  basis  of  the  Church. 
Every  man  was  armed  with  a  Concordance,  (alluded  to 
so  often  in  your  columns  as  the  Book  of  Concord,)  and 


2l6  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

with  the  help  of  that,  one  can  support  any  system.  A 
Concordance  has  this  advantage  over  the  fuller  Scripture, 
that  the  latter,  as  the  hymn  on  the  widow's  mite  says, 

"  May  forfeit  the  blessing  by  giving  too  much." 

The  Rev.  Felix  Medium  addressed  us  most  poetically.  . 
He  began  with  the  passage  about  brethren  dwelling  to- 
gether in  unity,  but  acknowledged  that  it  failed  to  ex- 
press the  utter  height  of  love  and  peace  and  charity  which 
would  be  required  of  us.  We  were  not  brethren,  far  from 
it;  but  it  was  deemed  advisable  that  we  should  be  united. 
Let  us  then  go  beyond  the  narrow  view  of  the  Jewish 
poet,  and  contemplate  the  fuller  glory,  where  the  wolf 
and  the  lamb,  the  young  lion  and  the  calf,  dwell  together. 
Let  us  enter  into  the  kingdom  as  little  children,  and 
gambol,  as  it  were,  on  each  other's  dens.  He  then 
summed  up  the  main  points  of  doctrine  held  among  us, 
and  showed  us  how  near  agreement  we  were  on  essen- 
tials. He  assured  us  that  if  we  refrained  from  questions 
which  gender  strife,  a  few  years  would  make  us  a  pros- 
perous and  strong  Church,  with  all  the  modern  improve- 
ments. Some  practical  remarks  were  made  by  laymen,  as 
to  the  necessity  for  cash  payments,  the  advantages  of 
hard  woods,  and  proper  modes  of  ventilation ;  and  then 
we  organized  the  First  United  Denominational  Church 
of  Olympus.  Each  man  pledged  himself  to  pay  five  hun- 
dred dollars  down ;  the  faith  of  the  members  was  left  to 
individual  consciences ;  and  no  doctrine  was  to  be  pub- 
licly taught  until  it  had  been  adopted  at  a  congregational 
meeting.  Each  member  was  also  to  receive  five  dollars 
a  week  in  case  of  sickness,  and  the  minister's  life  and 
furniture  were  to  be  insured. 

I  regret  to  say  that  three  families  in  our  town  declined 
to  take  part  in  the  new  organization,  and  curiously 
enough  it  happens  that  they  all  belong  to  your  sect.  I 
have  had  no  opportunity  of  studying  your  theology,  but 
I  think  it  must  be  deficient  in  a  power  of  assimilation,  so 
to  speak.  Neither  argument  nor  coaxing  moved  these 
Lutherans.     For  a  long  while  they  rode  ten  miles  every 


1876.]  THE  CONGREGATIONS  TAKE  PART.  217 

Sunday,  to  a  feeble  little  mission  somewhere  up  in  the 
country,  and  now.  with  a  few  more  families,  they  have 
a  tiny  church  of  their  own.  Quite  possibly  they  are  "ex- 
clusivists,"  and  think  their  seven-by-nine  shanty  is  the 
only  visible  church  in  Olympus;  when  the  fact  is,  it  is 
scarcely  visible  across  the  street.  Our  Church  is  very 
flourishing.  We  have  the  highest  spire,  and  the  largest 
cabinet  organ,  and  the  most  expensive  choir  in  the  county. 
We  have  a  sewing  society ;  a  "Green  Bay-Tree"  society 
for  the  young  men ;  a  "Daughters  of  Jerusalem"  society 
for  the  young  ladies ;  and  a  "Martha  of  Bethany"  so- 
ciety for  the  monthly  temperance  tea  parties.  We  have 
a  fair  every  two  years,  and  a  strawberry  festival  regularly 
when  strawberries  are  cheap :  and  we  are  thinking  of  an 
excursion  to  the  centennial. 

I  hope  my  letter  may  convince  your  readers  that  it  is 
not  necessary  to  be  anything  particular,  doctrinally,  in 
order  to  get  up  a  "Visible  Church."  The  great  points 
are:  i. — Avoid  discussion;  "we  must  not  strive."  "If 
any  man  be  ignorant,  let  him  be  ignorant."  "Knowledge 
puffeth  up,  but  Charity  edifieth."  2. — Be  conciliating, 
and  "love  as  brethren."  3. — Congregations  are  infallible; 
"no  doubt,  but  ye  are  the  people,  and  wisdom  shall  die 
with  you."  Paul  is  nothing,  (he  says  so  himself,)  Apol- 
los  is  nothing,  but  the  "way-faring  men,  though  fools, 

shall  not  err" 

Yours  most  sincerely, 

Alexandrina  L.  Medium,  nee  Mortimer. 

In  January,  1876,  the  Lutheran  editorially  published 
the  veiled  threat :  "Our  congregations  which  have  hitherto 
been  very  little  consulted  in  these  matters,  have  been  im- 
pelled to  take  them  into  their  own  hands ;  and  it  cannot 
now  be  stopped.  The  Synods  of  next  summer  and  au- 
tumn will  be  memorialized  on  the  subject  in  forms,  and 
to  an  extent,  which  will  prove  to  the  most  unwilling  what 
they  have  unfortunately  too  much  ignored."  St.  John's 
and  St.  Mark's  English  Churches  in  Philadelphia  did  so 
memorialize  the  Synod  of  Pennsylvania.     It  was  stated, 


/ 


2l8  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

"That  it  is  our  unanimous  conviction  and  belief,  that  we 
violate  no  given  law  of  God,  and  do  not  compromise  any 
doctrine  of  the  divine  Word  held  and  confessed  by  the 
common  Lutheran  Church,  when,  under  reasonable 
circumstances  and  just  limitations,  we  invite  into  our 
pulpit,  or  receive  at  our  altar,  ministers  or  people,  whom 
we  have  cause  to  regard  as  sincere  believers  of  the  saving 
doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  and  devout  observers  of  its 
sacred  ordinances,  even  though  they  be  not  of  our  own 
immediate  connection."  And  yet,  the  pastor  of  St. 
John's  himself.  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss,  was  hardly  in  full  accord 
with  such  views  and  such  practice.  In  an  editorial  in 
the  Lutheran  he  declared  distinctly,  "that  it  is  altogether 
safest  and  best  for  all  sides,  not  to  give  a  general  public 
invitation  to  members  of  other  denominations  to  join 
with  us  in  the  Holy  Communion.  We  have  not  given 
such  an  invitation  for  a  decade  of  years  or  more ;  and 
this,  we  believe,  is  the  prevailing  practice  in  the  General 
Council." 

Meanwhile  Dr.  Krauth  calmly  and  firmly  pursued  the 
even  tenor  of  his  way.  He  was  particularly  anxious  that 
the  good  cause  for  which  he  was  contending  should  not 
be  sullied  by  the  use  of  carnal  weapons,  by  human  passion 
and  offensive  personalities.  With  unwavering  loyalty  to 
his  old  friends  who  now,  to  his  great  sorrow,  differed 
with  him  on  this  issue,  he  frankly  and  promptly  criticized 
Dr.  Ruperti's  flings  at  "the  spirits  that  constitute  the  edi- 
torial bureau  of  the  Lutheran." 

I  think,  he  writes  to  him  (January  15,  1876),  the 
personal  allusions  were  simply  calculated  to  produce  bit- 
terness of  feeling,  and  to  close  the  hearts  of  the  men  as- 
sailed, and  of  their  friends,  to  the  truth.  Dr.  Krotel, 
Dr.  Seiss  and  Mr.  Kunkelman  are  men  who  love  the 
Church,  have  conscientiously  labored  for  it.  are  highly 
and  justly  esteemed  in  it,  and  are  certainly  entitled  to 
the  most  courteous  personal  treatment.     One  of  the  most 


1876.]  IN  QUIETNESS  AND  CONFIDENCE.  219 

serious  obstacles  in  the  way  of  the  advance  of  the  truth, 
is  the  harshness  of  the  men  of  the  Synodical  Conference, 
towards  those  who  have  not  been  able  to  see  entirely  with 
them.  If  we  don't  speak  in  their  way,  they  abuse  us  with- 
out stint:  if  we  do  speak  in  their  way,  they  say,  we  are 
dissemblers,  and  don't  mean  what  we  say.  While  you  are 
doing  good  by  standing  up  in  the  General  Council  for  the 
truth,  do  good  for  the  General  Council  by  helping  the 
Missouri  Synod  to  look  with  justice  and  kindness  upon  it. 
for  they  cruelly  misunderstand  its  real  spirit.  If  the  Gen- 
eral Council  be  broken  down,  it  would  be  an  immeasurable 
calamity  to  our  Church.  The  Synodical  Conference  might 
pick  up  some  of  the  fragments,  but  the  larger  part  of  it 
would  be  too  disheartened  to  attempt  a  new  organization, 
and  would  certainly  not  unite  with  any  of  the  existing 
ones. 

Dr.  Krauth  himself  quietly  proceeded  with  his  work  of 
explaining  and  defending  the  confessional  principle  which 
had  been  pronounced  by  the  General  Council  at  Gales- 
burg.  The  work  expanded  wonderfully  under  his  hands. 
Article  followed  upon  article,  until  he  had  covered  the 
Avhole  ground  in  a  series  of  fourteen  essays,  in  which 
his  vast  learning,  his  inexorable  logic  and,  above  all,  the 
depth  and  fullness  of  his  personal  conviction,  combined 
to  give  to  the  Church  the  most  profound  and  complete 
defense  of  "The  Purity  of  the  Pulpit  and  the  Sanctity 
of  the  Altar,"  she  ever  possessed  in  this  new  world,  or  in 
the  old. 

While  the  opponents  of  the  strict  "Rule"  continued 
to  consider  all  the  different  declarations  of  the  General 
Council  in  the  light  of  pastoral  regulations,  which  would 
naturally  and  necessarily  admit  of  "exceptions,"  and 
wished  that  the  General  Council  had  been  satisfied  with 
its  Pittsburgh  declarations,  with  which  they  claimed  to 
be  in  perfect  accord.  Dr.  Krauth  had  come  to  see,  that 
even  those  Pittsburgh  declarations,  correctly  understood 


220  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

and  logically  applied,  embodied  the  confessional  prin- 
ciple, though  he  himself,  at  the  time,  had  failed  to  recog- 
nize and  appreciate  their  full  bearing.  He  now  read  the 
fundamental  principle  of  confessional  discrimination  in 
the  pulpit  and  at  the  altar,  into  all  the  declarations  of  the 
Pittsburgh,  Akron  and  Lancaster  Conventions,  and  the 
whole  development  from  Pittsburgh  to  Galesburg  was 
to  him,  as  it  actually  was  in  the  history  of  the  Council,  a 
steady,  unbroken  progression  on  one  line  of  faithful  ad- 
herence to  the  Confession  of  the  Church.  "Our  aim 
is  to  see  whether,  in  the  light  which  we  now  have,  we 
can  come  to  the  full  comprehension  of  our  own  language  r 
for  often  nothing  is  harder  than  to  comprehend  the  full 
force  of  our  own  words.  We  have  often  found  a  prin- 
ciple to  the  acceptance  of  which  we  had  been  brought 
in  the  providence  of  God,  unfold  and  again  unfold  itself, 
until  we  have  been  astonished  at  the  result.  We  have 
admitted  the  acorn  and  it  has  become  an  oak.  The  prin- 
ciple is  unchanged;  but  the  consistency  of  the  acorn  is- 
development  into  the  oak.  What  a  boy  can  crush  in  his 
fingers  expands  into  that  which  defies  the  tempests  for 
ages.     Such  is  the  principle  in  its  outgrowth."* 

In  the  year  1876  the  General  Council  met  at  Bethle- 
hem, Penna.  The  official  action  of  eight  of  its  District- 
synods  on  the  Galesburg  declaration  was  reported  as  fol- 
lows: 

In  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania  (76,033  com- 
municants) its  delegation  had  stated  the  action  at  Gales- 
burg, together  with  the  President's  official  declaration,, 
from  which  no  appeal  had  been  taken ;  and  declared  its 
belief,  "that  the  manifest  intention  which  moved  this 
action  was  not  to  coerce  the  practice  of  our  congregations, 
but  to  set  forth  the  true  principle  on  this  subject,  and 
earnestly  to  direct  their  attention  to  it.     The  action  was 

*  Remarks  on  the  floor  of  the  Pennsylvania  Synod,  Reading,  1876. 


1876.]  SYNODICAL  ACTION  ON  THE  RULE.  221 

meant  to  be  not  governmental  but  educational ....  The 
Council  set  forth  its  conviction  of  that  which  is  true  and 
right  on  this  subject,  in  the  full  persuasion  that  sooner 
or  later  it  would  be  accepted  by  our  churches." 

The  New  York  Ministerium  (27,600  communicants) 
accepted  the  Galesburg  declaration  as  correct,  expressed 
its  approval  of  the  same  and  exhorted  its  pastors  to  strive 
with  wisdom  and  fidelity  that  this  rule  may  ever  more 
come  fully  into  practice. 

The  Pittsburgh  Synod  (10,759  communicants)  ap- 
proved the  action  of  the  delegates  at  Galesburg. 

The  District  Synod  of  Ohio  (6,677  communicants)  ac- 
cepted the  statement  of  its  President  who  in  his  report 
communicated  the  action  at  Galesburg. 

The  Michigan  Synod  (3,300  communicants)  ap- 
proved the  addition  made  at  Galesburg  to  the  first  part 
of  the  Akron  declaration,  but  desired  the  omission  of 
the  second  and  third  parts  with  reference  to  exceptions. 

The  Swedish  Augustana  Synod  (33,265  communi- 
cants) simply  re-afiirmed  its  Theses  on  Mixed  Com- 
munion. 

The  Indiana  Synod  (2030  communicants)  endorsed 
the  action  of  its  delegates  at  Galesburg.  They  had  voted 
against  the  Galesburg  declaration,  under  the  persuasion 
that  to  vote  for  it  would  have  been  equivalent  to  declar- 
ing any  exceptions  to  the  rule  a  departure  from  the  Word 
of  God  and  the  Confessions  of  the  Church. 

The  Holston  Synod  (2700  communicants)  adopted  the 
Galesburg  rule  interpreting  it  according  to  the  letter  and 
the  spirit  of  the  Akron  resolutions. 

The  attitude  of  the  different  Synods  and  the  lengthy 
and  animated  discussion  of  the  whole  subject  in  the  Beth- 
lehem convention  made  it  manifest,  that  all  the  endeavors 
of  the  past  years  to  decide  the  matter  by  formal  and  bind- 
ing resolutions  had  proved  unsatisfactory.  Thus,  after 
ten  years  of  labor  in  this  direction,  the  General  Council 


222  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

found  itself  at  the  very  point  where  it  ought  to  have  be- 
gun the  v^ork  at  Fort  Wayne  in  1867,  and  it  was  deemed 
necessary  to  order  the  preparation  of  a  set  of  theses,  by 
the  President,  which  might  work  out  a  conviction  of  the 
correctness  and  the  Scriptural  character  of  the  principle 
involved,  instead  of  passing  majority  resolutions  which 
would  always  be  a  stumbling  block  to  those  who  were  not 
convinced. 

This  action  of  the  General  Council  called  forth  the 
"105  Theses  on  the  Galesburg  Declaration  on  Pulpit  and 
Altar  Fellowship"  which  were  at  length  discussed  at  the 
Philadelphia  Convention,  in  1877,  and  in  several  sub- 
sequent meetings.  Soon  after  the  appearance  of  Dr. 
Krauth's  Theses,  Dr.  Seiss  published  "Twenty-Four 
Propositions  on  the  Galesburg  Declaration."  {Lutheran 
and  Missionary  September  20,  1877.)  In  these  he 
claimed  to  embody  the  real  mind  of  the  General  Council 
on  the  subject.  While  the  utterances  of  Dr.  Krauth,  in 
his  fourteen  Articles  and  the  105  Theses,  prepared  by 
the  President  by  order  of  the  General  Council,  were  only 
to  be  taken  as  the  private,  personal  views  of  one  who 
looked  "to  the  education  of  the  Church  in  a  particular 
Richtung,"  and  who  "introduced  materials  and  shadings 
which  do  not  profess  to  ground  themselves  on  any  direct 
expressions,  understandings  or  conscious  utterances  of 
the  General  Council,"  it  was  assumed,  that  the  "Proposi- 
tions" represented  "a  definite  determination  of  that  on 
which  the  General  Council  as  such  now  stands, — precisely 
what  the  Council  has  reached  in  its  official  pronounce- 
ments." Such  was  the  claim  of  the  author  of  the  Twenty- 
Four  Propositions,  who,  for  his  own  person,  was  con- 
vinced, "that  the  General  Council  in  its  proper  selfhood 
has  not  said  and  cannot  say,  that  the  body  of  its  ministers 
and  people  believe  or  admit  that  it  is  the  requirement  of 
God,  and  necessary  to  a  proper  Christianity,  as  held  and 


1877-81.]       FRUIT  OF  THE  GENERAL  COUNCIL.  223 

confessed  by  our  Church,  that  all  save  confessed  Lutiier- 
ans  must  needs  be  excluded  from  our  Altars  and  Pulpits." 
Dr.  Krauth  certainly  took  a  different  view  of  the 
real  position  of  the  General  Council.  And  he,  the  author 
of  its  Fundamental  Articles  of  Faith  and  Church  Polity; 
its  President  and  leading  theologian,  through  all  these 
years  of  fiery  combat ;  the  man  whose  declarations  the 
Body  had  more  than  once  adopted  as  its  own  official 
action,  and  whom  it  had  formally  charged  with  the  pre- 
paration of  the  Theses;  might  justly  be  expected  to  know 
and  to  represent  the  mind  of  the  Body.  We  have  his  final 
judgment  on  the  attitude  of  the  General  Council  with 
reference  to  this  question,  in  a  significant  letter  addressed 
to  his  successor  in  the  Presidency,  and  printed  by  reso- 
lution of  the  Council  in  the  minutes  of  the  Rochester 
Convention  (1881)  in  which  he  says: 

Our  General  Council  has  borne  rich  fruit  for  God's 
glory  and  the  future  of  the  Church.  Most  of  all  has 
she  done  a  great  work  in  the  testimony  for  which  she  has 
been  most  assailed.  In  her  principles  of  Pulpit  and  Altar 
Fellowship  she  has  vindicated  herself  from  the  reproach 
of  the  avowed  sectarianism  which,  in  our  day,  is  trying 
to  usurp  the  place  of  Apostolic  unity.  May  God  keep  her 
steadfast  in  the  assertion  of  principle.  May  He  make 
her  willing  to  perish  rather  than  to  surrender  it.  May 
He  make  her  whole  life  consistent  with  it,  and  may  He 
bring  all  who  love  her  to  see  eye  to  eye  with  her. 

We  close  this  chapter  with  a  few  extracts  from  Dr. 
Krauth's  vast  correspondence  on  the  mooted  question. 
He  has  carefully  preserved,  bound  up  in  a  volume,  not 
only  the  letters  received  from  friends  and  opponents,  but 
in  many  cases  also  copies  of  his  own  letters  in  answer  to 
correspondents,  showing  how  much  importance  he  at- 
tached to  this  controversy,  and  how  deeply  he  was  moved 
and  agitated  until  he  had  found  his  firm  anchorage. 


224  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

DR.   W.   A.    PASSAVANT  TO   C.    P.    K. 

Pittsburgh,  October  28,  1875. 

The  action  at  Pittsburgh,  Lancaster,  Akron  and 

Galesburg  on  the  subject  of  restricted  Communion  has 
never  been  discussed  in  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  or, 
in  other  words,  the  reasons  of  such  action  have  never 
been  given  in  a  loving  evangehcal  way  in  our  Church 
papers.  In  consequence, — though  there  is  a  good  degree 
of  unanimity  among  ministers  who  have  attended  the 
Council, — there  is,  as  you  saw,  dimness  and  confusion 
among  many ....  They  are  with  the  Council  because  they 
have  confidence  in  you  and  other  leading  brethren,  but 
they  cannot  explain  or  defend  the  action  of  the  Council, 
and  are  at  a  disadvantage  whenever  anyone  makes 
trouble  in  the  congregations 

It  now  becomes  necessary  for  some  one  to  reply  to 
Bro.  K.'s  inquiry.  Who  will  or  can  do  it  as  you?  I 
would  therefore  beg  you  with  all  importunity  to  once 
more  stand  up  for  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  by  a  brief 
article  or  two. 

The  writer  then  proceeds  to  give  an  outline  of  a  reply 
such  as  in  his  opinion  should  be  made.  Among  the  points 
he  mentions  are  the  following : 

The  question  is  not:  Who  is  a  Christian?  But,  with 
whom  are  we  to  commune?  If  with  anybody  who  is  pious 
in  our  judgment, — Baptist,  Calvinist,  Swedenborgian, 
Adventist,  Roman  Catholic, — then  let  us  abandon  our 
Confession  of  faith  and  give  up  our  denominational  and 
congregational  existence.  But  if  we  cannot  and  ought 
not  to  judge  our  fellow  Christians, — which  God  only  can 
do, — then  we  must  make  our  bond  of  union  and  com- 
munion what  we  believe  to  be  the  clearly  revealed  truth 
of  Christ.  Anything  else  but  this  is  a  mere  human  test 
and  is  not  to  be  thought  of  for  a  moment. 

Christian  consistency  requires  that  in  this  matter  of 
faith. — the  faith  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, — we  not  only 


1875-6.]  LETTERS  COXCERNING  THE  RULE.  225 

do  notliing  to  ignore  it,  but  everything  to  honor  it.  The 
Communion  is  the  highest  act  not  only  of  accord  with 
Christ  but  with  His  words  or  truth.  And  so  it  is  the 
highest  possible  act  of  accord  and  fellowship  with  those 
who  believe  in  Him  and  in  His  words. 

Christian  fidelity  to  others  who  do  not  yet  see  the  whole 
truth  of  Christ  and  yet  love  and  serve  Him  in  sincerity 
requires  us  thus  to  act.  We  must  mildly  but  firmly  bear 
our  testimony  against  their  wrong  views  and  teachings. 
To  go  to  the  same  table  with  those  whom  we  know  to 
be  in  error  in  regard  to  any  truth  which  Christ  has  re- 
vealed, is  not  only  to  hold  the  truth  of  Scripture  cheap, 
but  to  make  such  persons  all  the  more  settled  in  their 
errors,  or  indifferent  to  the  importance  of  truth. 

All  these  principles  accord  with  the  teachings  of  Christ 
and  our  Confessions.  We  can  do  nothing  against  the 
truth,  but  anything  for  the  truth.  The  more  loving  and 
gentle  and  the  more  strong  and  decided,  the  better.  Say 
something,  too,  of  this  modern  doctrine  of  indiscriminate 
communion.  It  is  not  the  doctrine  of  historical  Luther- 
anism  or  Calvinism.  Little  was  known  of  it  before  the 
present  century  of  Unionism,  which  grew  largely  out  of 
the  Rationalism  and  consequent  indifferentism  to  all  truth, 
and  drew  that  false  distinction  of  Fundamentals  and  Non- 
Fundamentals. 

I  look  to  you  in  hope.  To  you  more  than  to  any  other 
person  is  the  General  Council  indebted  for  its  fundamental 
principles  and  its  noble  testimony  for  Christ  and  His 
truth.  This  Body  likewise  has  shown  the  highest  possible 
confidence  in  your  character  and  position  by  repeated 
elections  to  the  presidency. 

DR.   H.  E.  JACOBS  TO  C.   P.  K, 

February  8,   1876. 

If  I  had  been  at  Galesburg,  I  might  have,  per- 
haps, been  of  some  service  in  reporting  your  statement, 
and  thus  in  preventing  the  unfortunate  state  of  things  in 
the  Council.     The  Rule  adopted,  as  understood  with  the 

15 


226  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap. XV. 

exceptions  concerning  Altar-Fellowship  accords  w^^^^^^ 
most  sacred  convictions.     Concerning  Pulpit-Fellowsh  p 
I  am  ready  for  the  rule  without  the  exceptions,      ihe 
chfe?  difficulty  that  I  have  fdt.  is  as  to  whether  the  action 
was  not  too  precipitate,  considering  the  state  of  knowl- 
Tdge  of  our  people     Out  of  love  of  the  weaker  Brethren, 
fat  first  thought  that  the  action  might  have  been  de- 
layed and  the  pressure  from  a  quarter  which  wiU  be  satis- 
fied with  no  declarations  however  explicit    might  have 
been  disreo-arded.     From  the  various  conflicting  state- 
ments r^^d?  I  had  also  derived  the  impression,  that  beneath 
the  rule  there  was  the  underlying  principle,  that  any  de- 
duction from  detached  portions  of  the  Confessions  was 
equally  binding  with  the  clear  statements  of  the  Con- 
fessions themselves,-and  this  was  a  position  which  I 
was  not  prepared  to  endorse.     But  your  articles.  .  .  .have 
put  the  entire  action  in  a  different  light.     You  have  com- 
pletely annihilated  the  whole  theory  of  Unionism,  and 
for  it  deserve  the  lasting  gratitude  of  the  Church 

While  still  it  might  be  advisable  to  yield  somewhat  to 
the  weakness  of  congregations  and  brethren,  it  the  re- 
quest be  made  entirely  upon  the  plea  of  a  weakness  that 
is  still  ready  to  be  taught,  yet  when  the  principles  at  issue 
are  themselves  called  into  question,  and  the  demand  made 
upon  grounds  that  would  be  utterly  subversive  of  our 
Lutheran  faith,  as  is  maintained  by  some  writers  m  the 
Lutheran,  and  will,  I  fear,  be  the  prevailing  sentiment 
among  those  who  oppose  the  rule,  I  do  not  see  how  the  e 
can  he  any  receding.  .  .  .If  theses  bearing  on  he  whole 
range  of  subjects  necessary  to  be  understood  for  an  in- 
telligent decision  of  the  question  could  be  discussed  at 
Synod  for  several  days  before  reaching  directly  the 
Galesburg  action,  my  hope  of  a  happy  deliveraiice  would 
be  much  brighter.  Yet,  the  Lord  reigns,  and  He  wil  un- 
doubtedly bring  a  blessing  out  of  the  present  distress. 


1876.]  HOPE  FOR  ALL  EARNEST  MINDS.  227 

C.    P.    K.  TO   H.    E.   JACOBS. 

February  19,   1876. 

I  was  particularly  anxious  to  have  your  judg- 
ment on  the  Rule,  although  I  felt  sure  that  you  would 
stand  where  your  letter  assures  me  you  do  stand.  I  rec- 
ognize now  tlie  hand  of  Providence  in  some  of  the  things 

which  at  first  I  may  have  felt  inclined  to  regret I 

intended  to  remain  silent  on  the  very  ground  of  which 
you  speak,  a  fear,  that  the  crude  state  of  opinion  among 
us  would  make  a  sharper  statement  of  principles  reac- 
tionary, rather  than  progressive  in  its  tendency.  But  when 
I  was  called  on  to  speak  I  could  not  but  speak  my  mind, 
and  now  I  rejoice  more  than  I  can  express  to  you,  that 
I  have  had  the  privilege  of  bearing  some  part  in  waking 
the  mind  of  the  Church  to  this  great  question.  It  is  in 
its  fundamental  principle  not  a  Lutheran  question  but 
one  for  the  whole  Church  of  Christ.  It  is  the  question 
of  the  sacredness  of  principle,  the  question  of  fidelity  in 
act  to  fidelity  in  conviction.  I  regard  the  announcement 
of  the  principle  as  educational  only,  and  no  one  will  go 
further  than  myself  in  concession  to  all  the  honest  weak- 
nesses of  Brethren  and  congregations.  No  force  work, 
no  haste  but  quiet,  earnest  discussion  of  principles  is 
what  we  need ....  I  wish,  you  would  write  to  our  friend 
Dr.  Seiss  on  the  points  on  which  you  have  written  to  me. 
He  has  a  very  great  respect  for  your  opinion,  and  the  pa- 
per of  this  week  shows  how  ill  at  harmony  he  is  even 
with  himself.  His  "Fencing  the  Altar"  will,  with  the  ex- 
tremists, impose  on  him  the  odium  of  standing  in  part 
with  what  they  hate,  and  yet  will  not  give  him  the  com- 
fort of  a  clear  and  consistent  adherence  to  the  truth.  With 
reference  to  the  great  future  of  our  Church  I  think  the 
present  is  the  most  hopeful  era  we  have  yet  seen.  That 
we  have  even  an  excitement  on  the  subject  marks  a  great 
advance.  .  .  .My  own  convictions  have  become  so  clear,  I 
have  found  so  completely  the  ground  toward  which  I 
have  been  struggling,  that  I  am  full  of  hope  for  all  earnest 
minds,  however  miseducated  they  may  have  been.     Noth- 


228  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

ing  fills  a  man  with  such  faith  in  the  truth  as  the  posses- 
sion of  it  does. 

There  are  two  great  favors  I  would  beg  of  you,  one 
for  myself,  the  other  for  our  dear  and  bleeding  Church 
For  myself,  that,  if  you  see  anything  in  my  articles  which 
either  in  principle  or  mode  of  statement,  you  think  objec- 
tionable, you  would  very  freely  express  your  judgment  to 
me      Be  assured  that  no  amount  of  plainness  will  have 
any  other  effect  upon  me  than  to  increase  my  gratitude 
to  you,  and  to  ponder  the  points  you  make  anew.     The 
other,  which  is  for  the  Church,  is,  that  as  soon  as  you 
can  you  would  write  something  on  the  subject.     I  am 
sure  knowing  as  I  do  your  modesty,  that  you  cannot  ap- 
preciate the  force  and  value  it  would  have.     The  defend- 
ers of  the  antagonism  to  the  Rule  are  doing  all  sorts  of 
mischief  to  their  own  cause.     The  one  or  two  who  are 
exceptions  to  this  must,  I  think,  feel  very  much  ashamed 
of  their  company.     Please  write  to  me  very  soon,  a  good 
long  letter      I  don't  deserve  letters  for  I  am  a  wretched 
correspondent,  but  I  do  enjoy  them  when  they  come  from 
a  friend  like  yourself. 

DR.  H.  E.  JACOBS  TO  C.  P.  K. 

February  12,  1876. 

It  is  as  clear  as  possible,  that  if  Drs.  Seiss  and 
Krotel  insist  either  on  the  Pittsburgh  or  Akron  resolu- 
tions, the  difficulty  will  not  be  remedied;  for  the  element 
which  antagonizes  the  Galesburg  declaration  is  just  as 
ready  to  annull  the  previous  decisions.  They  are  both 
much  nearer  you  than  they  are  to  S.   L.   H.   or  even 

J.  A.  K. 

May  I,  1876. 

As  you  have  asked  me,  and  I  have  promised,  to 

communicate  to  you  any  point  in  your  argument  where  I 
dissented,  there  is  one  position  to  which  I  must  allude. 
I  am  rather  of  the  opinion  that  even  on  this  point  there  is 
no  real  difference  between  us,  but  still  I  feel  constrained 


1876.]  LUTHERANS  MUST  PREACH  LUTHERANISM.     229 

to  notice  it  for  fear  that  it  is  otherwise.  If  a  Lutheran 
minister  be  invited  into  the  pulpit  of  another  denomina- 
tion, the  motive  of  the  invitation  must  be  either  to  show 
a  courtesy  to  the  minister,  or  that  the  curiosity  of  the  con- 
gregation be  gratified,  or  that  he  may  minister  to  their 
entertainment,  or  that  their  church  may  be  kept  open,  or 
that  they  Hsten  to  him  as  God's  ambassador.  No  minister 
should  accept  the  invitation  on  any  ground  except  the  last. 
And  if  this  be  the  ground,  the  congregation  has  no  right 
to  expect  of  him  anything  else  except  such  teaching  as  he 
may  deem  most  important  for  their  edification.  If  they 
have  sufficient  confidence  in  his  character  as  a  minister 
to  invite  him  into  their  pulpit,  they  can  complain  of  an 
abuse  of  that  confidence  only  when  the  end  of  his  preach- 
ing is  not  their  highest  spiritual  good,  but  some  ulterior 
purpose.  So  far  then  as  his  call  to  preach  to  the  congre- 
gation is  concerned,  there  is  no  doubt  as  to  his  right  to 
preach  on  any  controverted  point.  There  can  be  no  call 
to  preach  the  Gospel  where  a  supposed  call  implies  the 
denial  of  the  right  to  declare  all  the  counsel  of  God.  The 
question  then  is  not  as  to  the  right,  but  as  to  the  gain  for 
the  truth  that  may  be  expected,  from  preaching,  under 
such  circumstances,  polemical  sermons.  .  .  .1  believe  that 
a  true  Lutheran  minister  can  under  no  circumstances 
whatever  preach  a  Presbyterian  or  Methodist  sermon, 
even  on  subjects  on  which  the  two  churches  may  be  sup- 
posed to  agree.  There  is  a  radical  difference  in  the  mode 
of  thought,  in  the  degree  of  emphasis  placed  upon  com- 
mon doctrines,  and  in  the  relation  that  these  doctrines 
bear  to  one  another  in  the  Lutheran  and  all  other  sys- 
tems. These  differences  reach  to  the  very  centre,  con- 
dition the  church-life,  and  more  or  less  affect  the  teach- 
ing on  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone.  In 
fact,  the  Lutheran  Church  emphasizes  her  distinctive 
doctrines  so  strongly,  principally  because  she  recognizes 
this  intimate  organic  connection  between  them  and  justi- 
fication by  faith.  If  invited  therefore  into  the  pulpits  of 
other  denominations,  it  becomes  our  duty  to  present  this 
grand   central    doctrine   with   all    possible   clearness,    to 


230  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

guard  it  with  the  utmost  care  against  the  errors  into 
which  the  system  of  the  hearers  makes  them  especially 
liable  to  fall,  and  on  the  basis  of  this  doctrine  to  en- 
deavor to  undermine  the  principle  that  lies  beneath  all 
their  erroneous  conception  of  God's  truth;  in  other  words 
to  present  the  plan  of  salvation  as  it  is  taught  by  the 
Word  of  God,  and  confessed  by  our  Church,  even  with- 
out evading  those  particulars  in  which  we  differ  from 
the  church  in  whose  pulpit  we  are  preaching,  that  we 
may  be  sure  that  there  is  no  soul  in  our  audience  who  in 
the  world  to  come  can  charge  us  with  the  ruin  of  his  soul, 
because  of  our  want  of  clearness  in  proclaiming  the  Gos- 
pel. This  seems  to  me  to  have  been  the  plan  of  St.  Paul 
at  Athens,  who  did  not  make  a  professed  attack  upon  the 
idolatry  of  his  hearers,  but  upon  the  basis  of  the  common 
ground  on  which  they  stood  with  him,  gradually  led  them 
to  the  exposure  of  their  errors.  A  direct  assault  would 
have  arrayed  prejudices  against  the  Gospel,  which  would 
have  closed  the  doors  to  all  subsequent  efforts.  Not  that 
I  advocate  covert  instead  of  open  attacks,  but  simply  to 
make,  in  all  occasional  sermons  in  other  churches,  justi- 
fication by  faith  the  primary  object,  and  the  reference 
to  errors  the  subordinate,  instead  of  the  reverse. 

Now  I  believe  that  on  this  point  you  do  not  differ  far 
from  the  position  above  given 

Your  articles  are  very  attentively  read  here  (at  Gettys- 
burg). One  of  the  College  professors,  a  layman  and  a 
strong  partisan,  after  reading  your  third  article,  declared 
that  the  reasoning  was  so  conclusive  that,  while  he  did 
not  want  to  admit  it  and  tried  in  every  way  to  pick  flaws 
in  it,  he  found  that  it  was  useless,  and  he  could  do  noth- 
ing else  but  admit  its  conclusions, 

....1877. 

Concerning  your  Theses.  .  .  .1  can,  in  general, 

heartily  endorse  them,  but  am  not  ready  to  be  quite  as 
rigid  in  the  limitations  of  exceptions  in  admission  to 
communion.  Personally  I  have  no  trouble  in  regard  to 
the  pulpit,  which  I  believe  should  never  be  filled,  except 


i8-7.]  ALTAR    FELLOWSHIP.  23 1 

by  those  whom  the  Lutheran  Church  has  approved  as 
ministers,  and  that,  therefore,  the  preaching  in  our  pul- 
pits of  ministers  of  other  churches,  and  of  our  own  theo- 
logical students  is  wrong.  But,  with  respect  to  tlie  Altar, 
I  believe  that,  as  a  pastor,  I  would  be  compelled  by  my 
sense  of  duty,  to  admit  to  the  communion  those  who  ac- 
cepted the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and 
whose  connection  with  a  church  not  professing  our  faith, 
was  due  to  the  crime  of  our  own  Church,  in  not  making 
provision  for  the  spiritual  wants  of  its  children,  rather 
than  to  any  deliberate  intention  of  abjuring  our  con- 
fession on  this  part.  I  have  in  mind  the  case  of  those 
who  live  where  there  is  no  Lutheran  Church,  who  would 
prefer  to  be  in  a  Lutheran  Church,  but.  who,  convinced 
that  it  was  their  duty  to  confess  Christ  before  men,  have 
united  with  a  congregation  that  was  not  Lutheran,  and 
who  would  be  ready  to  join  the  Lutheran  Church,  if  a 
Lutheran  congregation  were  formed  at  their  home.  I 
freely  acknowledge  that,  if  they  have  proper  conceptions 
of  the  true  position  of  our  Church  and  the  true  nature  of 
our  Confessions,  they  cannot  be  in  this  relation.  Yet, 
I  believe,  that  we  must  make  allowance  for  a  weak  faith, 
and.  on  this  account,  we  cannot  limit  our  exceptions  to 
the  extent  of  the  Theses. 

Neither  can  I  agree  with  the  position  which  assumes 
that  other  churches  owe  their  origin  and  existence  to 
their  opposition  to  the  Scriptural  position  of  our  Church. 
Just  in  so  far  as  they  are  Churches  they  are  in  perfect 
accord  with  our  own  Church  and  God's  Word ;  and  owe 
their  existence  as  churches  to  those  truths  which  they 
still  hold  in  common  with  us.  Their  separation  from  us 
is  owing  to  their  error.  If  I  could  regard  them  as  or- 
ganizations whose  sole  purpose  is  to  protest  against  the 
doctrines  of  our  Confessions,  then,  of  course,  there  would 
be  no  alternative  left,  but  to  altogether  abandon  the  ex- 
ceptions allowed  by  the  Akron  statement. 


232  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

DR.  S.   FRITCHEL  TO  C.   P.   K. 

June  5,  1876. 

How  I  have  longed  to  send  you  a  word  of  sym- 
pathy and  to  express  to  you  my  joy  and  my  gratitude  for 
your  testimony!  My  dear  Brother,  after  all  the  Lord 
Jesus  Himself  must  always  be  the  true  and  only  reliance 
of  His  servants.  Even  those  who  are  of  one  mind  and 
thoroughly  united  in  their  joys  and  sufferings,  are  not 
able  to  impart  to  each  other  the  blessings  and  consola- 
tions of  spiritual  communion  in  such  a  measure,  that 
the  hearts  of  those  who  are  in  the  heat  of  battle,  should 
not  often  enough  feel  lonely,  so  that  they  can  find  their 
only  consolation  and  joy  in  the  assurance:  The  Lord  is 
on  my  side.  And,  I  think,  I  can  fully  appreciate  the  pain 
your  present  position  affords  you.  The  very  nearest 
friends,  in  union  with  whom  you  have  fought  so  many  a 
good  fight,  borne  such  cheerful  testimony,  and  suffered 

so  much,  are  now  against  you The  one  thing  that 

worries  me  most  in  this  conflict  is,  that  the  odious  ques- 
tion of  nationalities  is  being  mixed  up  with  it,  and,  as  I 
am  grieved  to  see,  not  less  on  the  German  side  than  on 
the  English.  It  is  a  sad  thing,  if  churchly  lines  of  de- 
markation  coincide  with  national  differences.  It  would 
seem  to  me  a  terrible  wrong  on  the  part  of  my  country- 
men, if.  at  the  very  moment  when  a  truly  confessional 
Church  of  the  English  tongue  is  ready  to  be  formed  and 

consolidated they    would    repel    their    English 

Brethren  by  their  carnal  nativism,  and  narrowness,  their 
lack  of  understanding  and  their  incapacity  to  handle  a 

purely  churchly  question  in  a  purely  churchly  spirit 

Nevertheless  I  rejoice  in  the  hope  that  truth  will  ulti- 
mately gain  the  victory  with  our  English  Brethren,  even 
though  for  the  present  a  majority  should  slide  back  into 
the  former  looseness.  Since  the  Galesburg  convention  I 
have  often  been  reminded  of  the  time  after  the  first  Coun- 
cil of  Nice.  As  there  the  high-water  mark  of  the  year 
325,  was  followed  once  more  by  a  terrible  ebb-tide,  thus 
the  level  reached  at  Galesburg  may,  for  the  present,  in 


1876.]  DR.  FRITSCHEL  AND  THE  EXGLISH.  233 

the  case  of  many  Brethren,  only  be  a  sign  or  a  mark,  and 
not  the  expression  of  their  personal  conviction.  They 
may  therefore  easily  become  the  prey  of  a  reactionary 
movement,  throwing  them  back  from  the  goal  already 
obtained.  But  real,  mature  progress,  based  upon  inner 
conviction,  can  never  be  annulled.  And  this.  I  am  sure, 
is  the  case,  with  the  Galesburg  resolutions,  with  the  ex- 
planation given  them  in  your  articles.  Here  the  English- 
Lutheran  Church  has  reached  a  decisive  point  ("Knoten- 
punkt")  in  her  development,  from  which  individuals  may 
possibly  be  thrown  back  again,  but  which  can  never  be 
lost  to  the  Church  herself.  I  think,  therefore.  I  may  say 
to  you  with  full  assurance :  Your  work  is  not  in  vain.  It 
may  seem  so  for  the  present,  but  to  the  position  which 
you  represent  belongs  the  future.  There  your  testimony 
will  bear  its  full  fruit.  When  Delitzsch,  in  the  beginning 
of  the  fifties,  wrote  on  the  question  of  Church-and-Altar- 
Fellowship.  he  lamented,  that  thus  far  it  had  been  treated 
only  in  a  categorical  manner.  Since  then  an  animated  dis- 
cussion of  the  subject  has  been  continued,  until  v.  Zezsch- 
witz  once  more  took  it  up  from  a  more  comprehensive 
point  of  view.  But  none  of  the  German  Theologians 
treated  the  question  as  thoroughly  as  your  articles,  bas- 
ing it  on  the  very  foundation  and  the  real  character  of 
the  Lutheran  Church  and  her  Confession.  And  I  am 
convinced  that,  though  some  of  our  English  Brethren 
cannot  yet  be  roused  to  a  full  understanding  of  this  great 
question,  your  book. — for  I  take  it  for  granted,  that  your 
articles  will  appear  in  book-form. — will  be  received  with 
profound  gratitude  and  joyful  appreciation  by  the  Church 
in  Germany.  It  is  my  heart's  desire  to  see  the  English 
and  German  sections  of  our  Church  in  this  country  in 
free  and  organic  co-operation,  so  that  each  side  might 
preserve  its  own  individuality  and  the  possibility  might  be 
secured  of  their  mutually  influencing  each  other  and 
learning  from  each  other.  I  therefore  cannot  but  thank 
God  most  profoundly,  that  the  very  best  and  deepest 
words  that  have  been  spoken  on  this  question,  which  deals 
with  the  ver>'  life  and  backbone  of  our  Church  and  her 


234  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

Confession,  have  come  from  the  EngHsh  side  of  the 
house  in  your  articles. 

PROF.   M.   LOY  TO  C.    P.    K. 

Columbus,  O.,  Easter,  1876. 

What  some  of  us  have  been  feebly  trying  to- 
do,  for  the  glory  of  our  dear  Lord  and  the  honor  of  His 
blessed  Word,  in  the  English  language,  you  have  recently 
been  doing  with  great  power.  God  bless  you  for  it .  . 
Knowing  that  it  is  a  comfort  to  faithful  workmen  in 
the  Lord's  cause  to  know  that  others  appreciate  their  la- 
bors, I  thought  it  might  even  afford  you  some  cheer  tO' 
be  assured  that  we  prize  your  work,  especially  as  you 
will  hardly  be  able  to  pass  through  the  crisis  without 
suffering. 

April  27,  1876. 

I  may  say  now  that  I  left  Reading*   with 

brighter  hopes  than  I  entered  it,  and  it  never  was  my 
choice  that  the  prospects  opened  there  should  be  clouded 
so  soon.  But  let  that  pass.  You  were  endowed  by  our 
dear  Lord  for  a  great  work  in  the  English  language. 
You  have  done  much,  and  many  hearts  that  beat  warmly 
for  the  Church  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  praise  the 
Master  for  it.  But  there  was  reason,  as  matters  had 
been  going  in  the  Body  of  which  you  are  the  honored 
President,  to  fear  that  the  influence  of  your  great  gifts 
would  be  lost  to  the  cause  of  pure  truth.  The  King  in 
Zion  is  a  wonder-working  Lord :  it  seems  all  coming 
right  again,  and  you  can  hardly  know  how  many  souls 
are  rejoicing  on  this  account.  May  God  give  you  grace 
to  stand  firm  in  the  conflicts  which  must  come. 

C.   p.   K.   TO  PROFESSOR  M.   LOY,  COLUMBUS,  O. 

Philadelphia,  April  20,  1876. 
My  Dear  Brother  Loy  : — I  thank  you  very  heartily 
for  your  kind  note.      It  has  been   one  of  my  greatest 
griefs  for  years  that  there  should  be  any  causes  of  separa- 

*  Referring  to  the  Convention  of  1866. 


1876.]  THE  GOOD  FIGHT  OF  FAITH.  235 

tion  between  myself  and  one  for  whom  I  had  cherished 
the  warm  regard  I  fek  for  you.  I  never  saw,  till  I  came 
to  see  the  truth,  how  deep  reaching  and  pervading  is  the 
question  which  is  now  under  discussion  in  the  Church ; 
and  a  true  apprehension  of  the  Church  as  our  own 
Church  sets  it  forth,  has  relieved  my  mind  of  one  of  its 
darkest  problems,  and  I  thank  God  anew  for  having,  of 
His  great  mercy,  brought  me  to  the  side  of  such  a 
Mother  as  our  Church  in  her  true  character  is.  The 
fellowship  of  conviction  has  brought  me  other  precious 

letters  besides  your  own Our  Church  has 

a  terrible  battle  before  her,  but  with  her  great  divine 
principles  and  God  blessing  her,  she  need  not  fear  the 
issue.  The  true  Church  will  always  be  relatively  a  little 
flock,  but  it  will  be  none  the  less  the  hope  of  the  world. 
Years  ago,  when  I  was  in  the  midst  of  pestilence  in  a 
strange  land,  trying  to  do  my  duty,  I  found  one  text  al- 
ways rising  to  my  mind,  "Thou  wilt  keep  him  in  perfect 
peace  whose  mind  is  stayed  on  Thee  because  he  trusteth 
in  Thee,"  and  I  never  had  a  more  perfect  sense  of  safety, 
though  I  was  surrounded  by  what  men  call  peril ....  And 
although  my  position  now  is  one  of  trial,  I  realize  the 
presence  of  my  all-sufficient  Saviour,  and  am  not  for  a 
moment  tempted  to  cease  the  good  fight  of  faith.  Know- 
ing that  in  my  poor  way  I  am  trying  to  fight  His  battle, 
I  can  commit  myself  and  the  cause  to  Him.  My  daily 
prayer  is :  Help  me  to  see  the  truth,  and  to  be  immoveable 
in  maintaining  it.  I  have  been  trying  to  discuss  prin- 
ciples so  as  to  help  thoughtful  men  to  a  well-grounded 
conviction,  rather  than  aiming  at  a  simply  popular  treat- 
ment. But  I  have  some  cheering  evidence  that  our  laity 
are  not  all  giving  themselves  passively  to  those  who  mis- 
lead them.  You  have  been  kind  enough  to  write  me  a 
very  precious  letter  of  sympathy,  but  I  must  beg  of  you 
another  letter, — a  letter  of  suggestion  and  of  warning 
if  you  think  I  need  it  for  any  reason. 

Verv  trulv  and  gratefully  your  Brother  in  Christ, 

C.  P.  K. 


236  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

C.    P.    K.   TO   REV.    C.   SPIELMANN,   LANCASTER,   O. 

Philadelphia,  April  7,  1876. 

I   am  sorry   to   see   that  your  health   is   so 

feeble,  yet  rejoiced  to  see  that  you  are  part  of  the  wit- 
nessing host  who  "out  of  weakness  were  made  strong" — 
and  I  pray  that  the  rich  grace  and  comforting  presence 
of  our  Covenant  God  and  Saviour  may  continue  to  be 
vouchsafed  to  you.  I  have  not  forgotten  the  happy  visit 
it  was  my  privilege  to  make  you*  and  hope  that  in  God's 
good  providence  we  may  meet  again. 

I  am  very  thankful  that  my  poor  efforts  in  behalf  of 
the  common  faith  have  met  the  approval  of  other  breth- 
ren very  dear  to  me,  from  whom  there  seemed  nothing 
to  divide  me  except  that  I  had  not  come  into  the  clear 
light  of  conviction  in  regard  to  the  pulpit  and  altar. 

I  am  constitutionally  very  hard  to  convince,  and  there- 
fore when  I  am  convinced  I  am  convinced  very  thor- 
oughly. If  what  I  write  is  useful,  I  think  it  is  by  God's 
blessing,  very  much  because  it  is  a  kind  of  indirect  auto- 
biography. I  try  to  carry  the  reader  over  the  ground 
by  which  I  reached  my  own  convictions.  I  am  aiming 
in  my  articles  to  reach  principles,  and  to  address  those 
who  are  willing  to  think.  The  chaos  which  this  dis- 
cussion has  revealed  is  fearful,  but  I  think  that  by  the 
time  God's  providence  in  it  has  fully  opened  itself,  there 
will  be  a  great  change.  There  are  indeed  tokens  of  the 
dawn  of  something  better  already. 

I  have  been  saddened  beyond  expression  by  the  bitter- 
ness displayed  towards  the  Missourians.  So  far  as  they 
have  helped  us  to  see  the  great  principles  involved  in  this 
discussion,  they  have  been  our  benefactors,  and  although 
I  know  they  have  misunderstood  some  of  us,  that  was 
perhaps  inevitable.  They  are  men  of  God,  and  their  work 
has  been  of  inestimable  value. 

I  look  as  you  do  upon  all  disposition  to  encourage 
prejudices  of  race  and  language  anywhere,  but  most  of 

*  At  the  Convention  of  the  General  Council  in  Lancaster,  O.,  1870. 


18/6.]  SILENCE  NOT  WANT  OF  SYMPATHY.  237 

all  in  our  Church — all  attempts  to  create  favor  or  dis- 
favor, on  the  pretences  that  anything  is  German  or  is 
English. 

In  regard  to  the  silence  of  pastors  and  professors  in 
our  Synod  I  would  say  I  know  that  the  silence  is  not  the 
result  of  want  of  sympathy  with  the  truth.  Drs.  Spaeth 
and  C.  W.  SchaetYer  have  expressed  themselves  strongly 
for  the  rule.  Dr.  Mann,  so  far  as  I  know,  is  favorable 
to  it.  Dr.  C.  F.  SchaefTer  I  have  not  conversed  with,  but 
all  his  antecedents  would  seem  to  indicate  that  his  judg- 
ment would  be  the  right  one.  Professor  Jacobs  at  Get- 
tysburg has,  as  you  know,  written  an  article  in  defense 
of  the  rule.  I  hope  that  our  best  men  will  ere  long  take 
ground  unequivocally. 

I  am  not  unaccustomed  to  standing  alone, — yet  not 
alone,  and  nothing  except  the  approval  of  God  and  of 
conscience,  cheers  me  so  much  as  letters  like  that  you 
have  sent  me.  As  you  see  dear  Brethren  who  give  me 
their  sympathies  and  prayers  thank  them  for  me,  and  beg 
them  to  continue  to  pray  for  me. 

Your  Brother  in  Christ, 

C.  P.  K. 

DR.   J.   A.   SEISS  TO  C.   P.    K. 

October  23,  1876. 

I  assume  that  I  am  to  continue  in  the  Lutheran  another 
year.  In  that  event  a  good  understanding  and  more 
sympathetic  help  are  imperiously  demanded.  Hence  this 
note  to  you.  Of  course  such  imbecile  criticism  of  the 
paper  as  we  had  at  our  stockholders'  meeting  is  of  small 
account ;  but  a  few  of  us  must  stand  and  work  together 
with  more  sympathetic  unity,  carefully  avoiding  aliena- 
tion of  interest  and  aim,  or  live  to  see  chaos  worse  con- 
founded. When  we  stood  solidly  together  for  our  Eng- 
lish interests  (the  interests  of  our  Church  in  America) 
against  radicalism,  and  on  our  proper  historic  line  of 
development,  we  were  able  to  accomplish  something. 
Just  as  there  has  been  deflection  from  that,  there  has  been 


238  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

distraction,  weakening  and  damage.  God  will  overrule 
it  for  good,  but  it  is  not  the  order  for  true  success.  The 
great  German  interests  must  be  considered,  but  I  am  sure 
we  weaken  ourselves  and  imperil  our  cause  by  any  turning 
from  our  English  Churches  and  tongue  wherein  we  were 
born,  or  even  seeming  to  allow  that  our  centre  of  gravita- 
tion is  to  be  found  anywhere  else.  Your  doctrines  on  the 
burning  question  went  too  far  for  me  and  for  our  situa- 
tion, and  if  pressed  must  only  alienate  and  distract.  But 
the  attitude  in  which  those  matters  are  now  officially 
placed  renders  them  manageable,  and  gives  room,  oppor- 
tunity and  call  for  us  to  try  to  unite  forces  for  a  new 
and  harmonious  departure,  whereunto  we  have  already 
attained  walking  by  the  same  rule.  Our  respective  po- 
sitions are  such  that  much  must  needs  depend  upon  the 
way  you  and  I  stand  or  move.  This  impresses  me  so 
deeply  that  I  think  it  necessary  for  us  to  consider  the 
matter  together,  and  arrange  for  such  a  unity  of  plan, 
aim  and  understanding,  that  we  can  heartily  defend  each 
other  and  work  in  thorough  sympathy  as  in  some  previous 
years.  This  I  believe  can  be  effected  without  com- 
promise or  dishonor  to  either,  and  advantageous  to  both 
and  to  the  great  common  interests  we  have  so  much  in 
hand.  I  wish  to  confer  about  the  paper,  to  have  you  in 
stronger  sympathy  and  co-operation  in  its  management,  to 
have  you  contribute,  and  to  have  you  join  me  to  move  for 
the  common  aim.  I  propose  also  to  commence  the  in- 
sertion of  a  sermon  from  one  of  our  preachers  every 
week,  and  to  begin  with  yours  at  Bethlehem,  if  you  will 
furnish  me  a  correct  copy  from  your  own  hand.  For 
this  most  directly  I  hereby  apply,  and  at  the  same  time 
for  a  free  and  candid  personal  conference  over  all  the 
matters  herein  touched,  provided  it  be  agreeable  to  you  to 
confer  with  me  in  the  premises. 

J.  A.  S. 


t876.]  doctrinal  ARTICLES  IN  THE  LUTHERAN.       239 
C.   P.   K.  TO  DR.  J.  A.  SEISS. 

October  23,  1876. 

Mv  Dear  Dr.  Seiss  : — I  heartily  concur,  both  in  your 
judgment  as  to  the  desirableness  of  unity  and  your  earnest 
desire  for  it.  I  am  opposed  to  an  English  or  German 
policy,  and  believe  only  in  a  Church  policy — a  Lutheran 
policy — a  Christian  policy;  and  there  is  no  Christian 
policy  whose  heart  is  not  Christian  principle.  I  must  be 
left  free  to  maintain  my  convictions,  but  I  shall  try,  as 
I  have  tried,  to  do  it  in  the  spirit  of  love  and  of  justice  to 
those  who  do  not  think  with  me.  I  am  most  cordially 
■willing  and  desirous  of  co-working  with  you.  Much  of 
the  happiest  part  of  my  official  life  has  been  spent  in 
work  in  which  we  were  conjoined  heart  and  soul.  Nor 
do  I  see  that  our  difference  in  judgment  on  part  of  the 
questions  now  before  the  Church,  nor  our  fraternal  dis- 
cussion of  it.  should  in  any  measure  separate  us.  It  is 
my  desire  to  do  all  I  can  for  the  paper  consistently  with 
your  wishes  as  its  Editor.  When  Mr.  Richards  sent  in 
the  bill  for  the  last  year  I  expressed  some  surprise  as  I 
had  been  writing  a  good  deal,  and  supposed  that  it  was 
your  own  proposition  that  to  a  limited  degree  there 
should  be  allowed  some  compensation.  That  compen- 
sation I  have  not  taken,  and  would  not  take  except  as  it 
covered  the  subscription  for  the  year,  nor  did  I  desire 
■even  that,  if  you  found  that  the  paper  could  not  afford  it. 
Mr.  Richards  explained  that  the  reason  of  the  act  which 
surprised  me  was  that  my  articles  were  inserted  as  a 
"personal  favor."  From  his  official  position  I  assumed 
that  he  spoke  by  authority,  and  you  can  imagine  that  his 
explanation  was  not  very  stimulating  to  further  author- 
ship. I  write  this  not  by  way  of  complaint  but  of  ex- 
planation. I  hope  we  shall  meet  very  soon,  and  should 
be  glad  if  you  would  fix  a  time  and  place  for  meeting. 

In  regard  to  my  sermon  I  would  say  that  I  will  very 
Avillingly  prepare  it  for  the  Lutheran,  but  would  not  on 
any  account  be  willing  that  it  should  re-appear  with  the 


240  CHARLES  PORTERFJELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

blunders  and  omissions  in  the  Bethlehem  report.  Under 
all  the  circumstances  that  report  was  very  creditable,  but 
it  would  have  been  a  miracle  to  have  reproduced  the 
sermon  correctly. 


C.   p.    K.   TO  DR.   G.   F.   KROTEL. 

September  12,  1877. 

I  write  to  thank  you  for  the  kindly  spirit  in  which  you 
notice  the  theses  in  the  Lutheran  of  this  week.  However 
we  Brethren,  who  have  so  long  labored  together,  and  are 
endeared  to  each  other  by  so  many  toils  and  sacrifices  in 
common,  may  differ,  in  part,  and  for  a  time,  on  questions 
of  importance,  let  us  be  fixed  in  the  resolve  that  nothing 
shall  alienate  us  personally,  and  that  we  will  resist  to- 
gether all  efforts  to  drag  pure  questions  of  principle  into, 
the  slough  of  personalities. 


DR.  G.   F.   KROTEL  TO  C.   P.   K. 

September  13,  1877. 

I  read  your  letter  with  a  great  deal  of  pleasure,  and 
fully  share  your  earnest  desire  that  none  of  these  ques- 
tions may  alienate  Brethren  who  have  labored  together 
so  long.  You  know  that  I  have  felt  and  talked  strongly 
upon  them,  partly  because  I  thought  the  positions  takeui 
by  the  General  Council  entirely  too  much  in  advance  of 
the  comprehension  of  our  people,  and  partly,  because  I 
have  been  and  am  still  convinced,  that  there  is  a  weak 
point  in  the  strong  logical  chain  which  you  have  forged,, 
and  which  I  trust,  will  be  brought  out  in  the  gradual  dis- 
cussion as  it  was  at  Pittsburgh.  Your  logic  is  inexor- 
able, and  if  one.  to  speak  with  the  Germans, — says  A. 
with  you,  he  is  almost  or  quite  compelled  to  say  B.  The 
logical  and  inevitable  conclusion  of  your  argument  would 
be  such  an  exclusiveness,  as  was  not  even  always  seen  in. 


iS;-.!  DR.   KROTEL'S   LETTER.  24 1 

Luther's  day,  and  such  as  would  render  anything  like  an 
approximation  to  a  better  understanding-  with  others  an 
impossibility.  It  has  always  been  clear  to  my  mind,  that 
there  must  be  a  difference  in  the  attitude  we  assume  to 
the  Romanists  and  Greeks, — and  to  the  "Evangelical 
Denominations."  If  we  refuse  any  and  every  kind  of 
recognition  to  everyone  that  refuses  to  hold  every  point 
that  we  consider  scriptural,  or  that  holds  any  point  that 
w^e  consider  unscriptural,  where  are  the  divisions  to  end? 
Is  not  this  the  very  disease  from  which  our  German  or- 
thodox Lutherans  are  suffering?  Do  they  not,  here  and 
in  Germany,  unchurch  each  other,  simply  because  they 
differ  on  some  points  on  wdiich  they  insist  as  a  part  of 
God's  truth?  If  they  go  on  in  this  way,  how  numerous 
are  the  divisions  of  Lutheranism  likely  to  be? 

Then,  too,  when  I  consider  the  ignorance  of  doctrine, 
and  the  prevailing  indifference  to  it,  even  in  our  own 
Church,  it  always  seems  to  me  that  these  movements  and 
doctrinal  positions  have  been  premature.  They  have 
prejudiced  the  minds  of  many.  They  are  impatient  of 
instruction.  The  clearly  expressed  conclusion  is  so  abhor- 
rent, that  they  refuse  to  go,  step  by  step,  from  the  prem- 
ises to  the  conclusion.  The  heart  has  a  great  deal  to  do 
with  our  religion.  The  hearts  of  our  people  are  set,  in- 
stinctively, against  the  position,  which  can  only  be  reached 
by  a  process  of  reasoning  for  which  most  of  them  have 
neither  the  head  nor  the  inclination.  Even  the  positions 
reached  by  representative  men,  at  Pittsburgh,  were  in  ad- 
vance of  the  people.  These  should  have  had  ample  time 
to  work  themselves  into  the  marrow  of  their  bones. 

Pray  do  not  look  upon  these  lines  as  any  attempt  to 
argue  the  point.  I  do  not  wish  you  to  reply  to  them. 
The  discussion  at  the  Council  will  bring  out  all  the  points. 
We  all,  I  trust,  want  the  right.  May  God  help  us  to  find 
it.  .  .  .Let  me  tell  you  what  I  told  you  before, — you  work 
too  hard.  We  cannot  afford  to  lose  you.  No  English 
pen  has  done  such  service  for  our  Church,  and  the  work 
is  not  at  an  end. 
16 


242  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

DR.  H,  I.  SCHMIDT  TO  DR.  C.  P.  K. 

October  4,  1877. 

My  Dear  Friend: — I  feel  myself  constrained  to  say 
a  few  words  to  you  relative  to  the  admirable  theses  on 
the  subject  of  pulpit  and  altar  fellowship  which  you 
quite  recently  laid  before  the  Church.  I  have  read  and 
studied  them  with  great,  with  unmixed,  satisfaction.  The 
principle  which  you  affirm  and  defend  in  them,  is,  as 
you  earnestly  maintain,  grounded  in  the  absolute  agree- 
ment of  our  Confessions  with  the  Word  of  God.  That 
the  several  distinct  portions  of  our  Book  of  Concord  do 
thus  agree  with  the  divine  Word,  no  genuine  confessional 
Lutheran  will  ever  dream  of  denying.  But,  more  than 
this,  we  believe  that  the  Creed  of  no  other  Protestant 
Church  exhibits  that  entire  and  perfect  agreement  with 
the  teachings  of  sacred  Scripture  which  we  claim  for 
our  Confession.  And  accordingly,  while  we  do  not 
assume  or  presume  to  unchurch  any  other  Protestant 
denomination,  we  must  and  do  maintain,  that,  as  our 
Church  alone  holds  the  primitive  scriptural  faith  of  the 
Christian  Church,  all  others  are,  more  or  less,  in  error, 
either  lacking  essential  elements  of  divine  truth,  or 
actually  teaching  unsound  doctrine.  Hence  a^  vigilant 
guardianship  of  our  sacred  heritage  requires  us  to  avoid, 
as  far  as  possible,  all  contact  with  such  error.  And  this 
involves  an  exclusiveness,  a  modification  of  which  could 
be  justified  only  by  an  actual  necessity. 

We  safely  assume  that  some  one  Protestant  denomina- 
tion will  eventually  become  the  leading  one  in  our 
country,  and  should,  if  poor  humanity  were  capable  of 
absolute  consistency,  absorb  all  others.  If,  as  we  be- 
lieve, the  Lutheran  Church  alone  holds  the  truth  in  its 
completeness,  without  admixture  of  error,  she  is  fairly 
entitled  to  aspire  to  that  high  position,  and  I  venture  to 
hope  that  she  will,  in  due  course  of  time,  be  conducted 
to  it  by  divine  providence.  But  this  consummation  is  not 
likely  to  arrive,  if  she  virtually  discards  her  pre-eminence 


i877.]  EDUCATION,  NOT  THUMB  SCREWS.  243 

by  cultivating'  a  free  and  easy  fellowship,  in  her  pulpits 
and  at  her  altars,  with  denominations  which  she  regards 
as,  more  or  less,  in  vital  error,  and  thus  commits  herself 
to  the  sanction  of  denominationalism  and  exposes  her 
communion  to  the  intrusion  of  what  she  cannot  believe 
or  approve.  x\nd  hence  the  necessity  of  normally  eschew- 
ing such  fellowship. 

The  fact  tiiat  our  people  are  not  prepared  yet  to  take 
such  decided  ground  in  principle  and  practice  only  renders 
that  educational  process  which  you  so  clearly  indicate  in 
Thesis  I  indispensably  necessary.  It  is  not  proposed  to 
put  on  the  thumb  screws,  and  to  resort  to  coercive  dis- 
cipline in  order  to  compel  conformity  with  the  principle 
which  you  so  powerfully  advocate.  It  is  proposed  to 
carry  out  the  ancient  maxim,  "Festina  Lente,"  and  to 
have  patience,  meanwhile  employing  all  necessary  and 
legitimate  means  to  educate  our  membership  up  to  the 
adoption  and  practical  application  of  the  principle  so 
clearly  and  forcibly  stated,  and  so  admirably  and  con- 
clusively defended  in  your  theses.  I  confess  that  I  can- 
not appreciate  the  objections  raised  and  the  antagonism 
displayed,  in  one  shape  or  another,  against  the  principle 
and  its  ultimate  necessary  operation,  which  are  the  burden 
of  your  theses.  What  they  advocate  is  nothing  new  in 
the  history  and  practice  of  Protestant  Denominations ;  the 
Episcopalians  and  Close  Communion  Baptists  hold  to 
and  enforce  the  rule  of  non-fellowship.  .  .  .1  regard  your 
statement  of  the  principle  or  rule  which  will  ultimately 
have  to  determine  and  govern  the  practice  of  the  Lutheran 
Church  as  impregnable,  and  the  arguments  with  which 
you  defend  them  as  unassailable,  unanswerable,  irre- 
futable, and  as  such  they  command  my  hearty  and  un- 
qualified consent. 

At  the  eleventh  convention  of  the  General  Council,  held 
in  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Communion,  Philadelphia, 
October  10  to  16,  1877,  the  interest  centred  on  the  great 
problem  of  Church  Fellowship.     Dr.   Krauth  preached 


244  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

tlie  opening  discourse  on  John  viii.  48,  with  the  theme : 
Religion  and  Religionisms.  It  was  afterwards  pubhshed 
by  the  students  of  the  Theological  Seminary.  The  Theses 
on  the  Galesburg  Declaration  on  Pulpit  and  Altar  Fel- 
lowship, prepared  by  order  of  the  General  Council  by  its 
President,  were  discussed  for  three  consecutive  days.  The 
depth  of  Dr.  Krauth's  convictions,  his  unwavering  and 
consistent  fidelity  to  the  confession  of  his  beloved  Church, 
his  inexorable  logic  in  debate,  but  at  the  same  time  also 
his  patience,  tenderness  and  generosity  in  the  treatment 
of  his  opponents,  were  never  more  triumphantly  con- 
spicuous than  in  that  memorable  debate.  Dr.  Seiss,  to- 
gether with  Dr.  J.  A.  Kunkleman,  led  the  opposition 
against  the  Theses,  and  at  the  very  beginning  of  the  dis- 
cussion the  former  offered  a  written  protest  against  the 
first  Thesis,  charging,  "that  it  introduces  an  unauthorized 
idea  for  quieting  apprehensions,  which  is  intensely  decep- 
tive, inasmuch  as  profession  is  made  that  nothing  legis- 
lative, coercive  or  disciplinary  is  intended  or  meant,  and 
that  we  are  not  in  a  condition  to  decide  those  questions 
now,  while  yet,  in  this  soft  and  insinuating  way,  the 
whole  matter  is  sought  to  be  summarily  decided  in  ad- 
vance, in  the  most  binding  and  coercive  manner  in  which 
the  mind  and  conscience  of  man  can  be  bound."  It  was, 
to  say  the  least,  an  uneven  battle.  Dr.  Seiss  himself,  in 
the  leading  article  of  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  Nov- 
ember 1st,  characterizes  the  discussion  in  these  words: 
"The  friends  of  the  Theses  had  the  great  advantage  in 
having  their  cause  solidly  and  ably  embodied  in  printed 
Theses,  and  in  assigning  the  whole  management  of  their 
argument  to  one  man,  the  author  of  the  Theses,  the 
President  of  the  Body.  Whoever  spoke,  or  whatever 
was  said  as  bearing  against  the  positions  of  the  Theses, 
the  author  of  them,  if  he  did  not  volunteer  to  do  it,  was 
specially  called  on  to  make  a  reply,  which  was  in  every 
instance  accepted,  and  always  at  great  length;  thus  giv- 


1877]      AN  EMINENTLY  SUCCESSFUL  MEETING.  245 

ing  to  the  presentation  on  that  side  a  unity,  individuahty, 
ampleness  and  power  of  much  value  to  the  cause  of  the 
exclusivists  over  against  all  dissent.  On  the  more  moder- 
ate side  there  was  no  such  combination,  concentration  or 
consistency  of  presentation." 

Dr.  J.  G.  Morris,  of  Baltimore,  a  member  of  the  Gen- 
eral Synod,  sums  up  his  impressions  of  the  convention 
in  a  letter  to  his  friend  Krauth  (October  22,  1877)  :  "I 
was  much  pleased  with  the  dignity  of  your  Council,  the 
gentlemanly  tone  that  pervaded  it, — no  severity,  no  pas- 
sion, no  excitement  of  any  kind, — hard  logic,  sound 
reasoning,  earnestness  and  evident  sincerity  all  round." 
And  Dr.  C.  W.  Schaeffer,  of  Germantown,  wrote  (Oc- 
tober 18,  1877)  : 

While  I  offer  my  congratulations  to  yourself  personally, 
I  feel  as  if  I  ought,  at  the  same  time,  to  offer  them  to 
the  whole  Lutheran  Church  on  the  happy,  and  as  I  be- 
lieve, eminently  successful  meeting  of  the  General  Coun- 
cil, just  concluded.  You  have  no  doubt  heard,  as  I  have 
heard,  from  divers  sources,  evidence  of  good  and  deep 
impressions  made  by  the  truth,  and  of  progress  in  the 
knowledge  of  it,  in  quarters  where  such  progress  is  very 
desirable  and  important.  It  was  a  very  happy  thing  that 
the  discussion  was  confined  to  so  few  individual  partici- 
pants, and  that  such  full  liberty  was  accorded  to  the  op- 
position to  state  their  case.  The  service  you  have  ren- 
dered is  inestimable,  and  the  interest  taken  in  your  ex- 
planations of  the  true  position,  showed  no  sign  of  weari- 
ness, even  to  the  end. 

I  consider  that  it  was  a  most  happy  termination  of  the 
discussion  that  the  Council  adjourned  without  having 
come  to  any  positive  declaration.  This  is  in  strict  har- 
mony with  the  principle  that  we  are  pursuing  a  course 
of  education,  and  I  think  that  the  proof  will  soon  be 
manifest,  that  the  late  Council  has  done  much  in  that 
direction. 

Again,  my  dear  Dr.   Krauth,  I  thank  you  and  pray 


246  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

that  your  years  of  usefulness  as  a  teacher  of  science  and 
a  defender  of  truth  in  the  Church  of  the  Living  God, 
may  be  very  many. 

Two  years  afterwards  the  General  Council  held 
its  twelfth  convention  at  Zanesville,  O.,  October  9  to  14, 
1879.  It  was  the  last  meeting  which  Dr.  Krauth  at- 
tended. He  submitted  the  design  for  the  seal  of  the 
General  Council  which  he,  together  with  the  treasurer, 
Mr.  W.  H.  Staake,  had  been  instructed  to  prepare.  The 
device  represents  at  its  base  the  open  Bible,  on  the  Old 
Testament  side  of  which  are  noted  the  texts.  Genesis  i.  3, 
and  Isaiah  ix.  2.  On  the  New  Testament  side  the  texts 
noted  are  Matth.  iv.  16,  and  John  i.  4-9.  The  Bible  as 
shining  with  the  light  of  its  witness  to  our  God  and 
Saviour,  to  dispel  the  darkness  of  the  world,  is  regarded 
on  the  device  as  the  sun,  whose  rays  are  refracted  in  the 
seven  arches  of  the  rainbow.  These  arches  are  made  to 
correspond  i,  to  the  Apostles'  Creed;  2,  the  Nicene 
Creed;  3,  the  Athanasian  Creed;  4,  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession and  the  Apology;  5,  the  Smalcald  Articles;  6,  the 
Large  and  Small  Catechisms,  and  7,  the  Formula  of 
Concord.  These  seven  forms  of  Confession  widen  from 
the  point  nearest  the  Word,  so  as  to  indicate  the  amplify- 
ing of  the  testimony.  They  are  represented  as  rainbow 
arches,  to  mark  their  relation  to  the  Word  which  is  the 
suprerrie  rule  and  source  of  the  truth  which  they  reflect, 
and  on  which  they  depend.  Beneath  is  indicated  the  Con- 
tinent of  North  America,  on  the  clouds  over  which,  the 
rainbow  rests.  The  legend  of  the  seal  is  Sigillum  Concilii 
Ecclesise  Evangelicse  Lutheranse  in  America  Septen- 
trionali.  All  the  inscriptions  are  in  Latin.  The  seal  was 
adopted,  and  the  President  of  the  General  Council  was 
ordered  to  act  as  its  custodian. 

The  discussion  of  the  Theses  on  the  Galesburg  declara- 
tion on  Pulpit  and  Altar  Fellowship  was  continued.     The 


1879.]  DR.  KROTEL  AT  ZANESVILLE.  247 

body  as  there  constitutetl  seemed  almost  unanimous  in 
favor  of  the  position  taken  by  the  Theses.  Dr.  J.  A. 
Seiss  did  not  attend  the  convention.  Dr.  G.  F.  Krotel 
was  really  the  only  one  who  openly  declared  himself 
against  the  Theses  as  representing  the  true  mind  of  the 
General  Council  on  this  important  subject.  In  a  lengthy 
speech  which  was  characterized  by  his  usual  candor  and 
manliness,  he  rehearsed  the  whole  history  of  the  "Four 
Points"  in  the  General  Council  since  the  first  convention 
in  Fort  Wayne,  1867.  He  did  not  enter  into  an  argument 
against  the  principle  laid  down  in  the  Theses,  but  warned 
against  any  hasty  action  and  advised  that  the  Theses  be 
sent  down  to  the  Synods  and  Conferences  for  thorough 
discussion.  He  frankly  admitted  in  his  account  of  the 
Zanesville  convention  in  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary, 
that,  if  a  vote  had  been  taken,  the  position  of  the  Theses 
would  have  been  endorsed  by  a  sweeping  majority.  The 
motion  was  actually  made  for  such  a  decision,  but  was 
strongly  opposed  by  Drs.  B.  M.  Schmucker  and  A. 
Spaeth;  and  Dr.  Krauth  himself,  who  had  given  the  chair 
to  the  Rev.  Phil.  Krug,  in  order  to  participate  freely  in 
the  debate,  stated  that,  if  he  had  been  in  the  chair,  he 
would  have  declared  the  motion  out  of  order,  as  the 
Theses  had  been  prepared,  not  for  definite  action,  but  for 
full  and  ample  discussion. 

The  personal  relations  between  Drs.  Krotel  and  Kra:uth 
remained  undisturbed  by  their  difference  of  opinion  on 
the  mooted  question.  'T  have  every  reason  to  believe," 
wrote  Dr.  Krotel.  October  25,  1879,  "that  you  have  the 
warmest  regard  for  your  friends,  no  matter  how  much 
they  may  differ  from  you  in  some  points,  provided  they 
are  honest  and  outspoken.  And  your  friends  will  do  you 
the  justice  to  say  that  it  would  be  difficult  to  find,  on  any 
floor,  or  in  any  presidential  chair  a  more  courteous,  fair 
and  considerate  opponent  than  yourself." 


348  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XV. 

Dr.  Krotel  succeeded  Dr.  Seiss  as  Editor-in-Chief  of 
the  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  October  30,  1879,  but,  to 
Dr.  Krauth's  great  sorrow,  resigned  again  February  19, 
1880.  "In  spite  of  the  fact  that  Dr.  Krotel  seemed  to 
me  not  in  the  clear  on  some  great  questions,  I  yet  have  so 
much  confidence  in  his  integrity  and  fair  dealing,  and  had 
received  so  explicit  an  assurance  from  him  that  the  paper 
would  be  honest  in  allowing  the  presentation  of  unpopular 
truth,  that  I  was  greatly  gratified  at  his  accession  to  the 
editorship.  But  I  constantly  added, — the  thing  is  too 
good  to  last.  I  have  proved  to  be  prophetic.  Dr.  Krotel's 
last  number  as  editor  will  be  issued  next  week.  The  cause 
of  his  resignation  is  dissatisfaction  with  the  way  in  which 
the  men  who  hold  the  larger  number  of  shares  of  stock 
have  acted.  What  my  relations  to  the  paper  will  be  in 
the  future  I  do  not  know.  For  the  immediate  present  I 
am  pledged  to  the  publishers  as  well  as  to  the  paper  for 
book  notices."  (Letter  to  Rev.  A.  Pflueger,  February 
13,  1880.) 

The  indications  contained  in  this  letter  show,  what 
was  no  longer  a  secret  among  well  informed  friends  at 
that  time,  that,  unfortunately  the  former  intimate  per- 
sonal relations  between  Drs.  Seiss  and  Krauth  had  been 
seriously,  and,  in  fact,  irreparably  disturbed  by  the  strain 
arising  from  their  different  attitude  in  the  question  of 
Church  Fellowship.  In  January,  1879,  Dr.  Krauth  had 
addressed  a  long  letter  to  his  former  friend,  in  which, 
with  much  frankness  and  yet  greater  tenderness,  he 
sought  to  remove  the  difficulties  that  threatened  to  separ- 
ate them.  "One  law  of  my  life,"  he  says  in  this  letter, 
"has  been  not  to  allow  private  feelings  to  interfere  with 
public  duties.  My  whole  nature  is  one  which  yearns  for 
peace.  I  have  been  compelled  by  deep  conviction  to  take 
the  very  unpopular  side  of  a  great  question.  All  who 
profess  to  love  truth  and  to   reverence  conscience   su- 


i879.]  A  REJECTED  APPEAL.  249 

premely,  ought  to  aid  each  other  to  a  dispassionate  hear- 
ing whether  they  reach  the  same  results  or  not 

Either  of  us  may  be  speedily  called  hence ;  both  of  us  may 
be.  I  have  looked  upon  sudden  death  as  that  by  which  I 
shall  most  probably  be  summoned."  But  the  answer  to 
this  appeal  convinced  Dr.  Krauth  that,  under  Dr.  Seiss's 
editorship,  "he  could  no  longer  continue  harmoniously 
in  a  relation  to  the  Lutheran,  which  would  involve  a 
high  degree  of  mutual  confidence." 


SIXTEENTH  CHAPTER. 

PROFESSOR    OF    PHILOSOPHY    AND    VICE-PROVOST    IN    THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF   PENNSYLVANIA. 

I 868-1 883. 

The  University  of  Pennsylvania,  one  of  the  oldest  in- 
stitutions of  learning  in  the  United  States,*  grew  out  of 
an  Academy  and  Charity  School  planned  by  Benjamin 
Franklin  as  early  as  1743.  His  "Proposals  relative  to 
the  education  of  youth  in  Pennsylvania"  (1749)  led  to 
the  organization  of  a  Board  of  Trustees,  chartered  in 
1753  as  "The  Trustees  of  the  Academy  and  Charity 
Schools  in  the  Province  of  Pennsylvania."  Under  the 
energetic  management  of  Dr.  Wm.  Smith,  a  Scotchman 
and  a  clergyman  of  the  Anglican  Church,  the  institution 
became  practically  a  College  with  a  new  charter,  (1755) 
designating  its  Body  and  Faculty  as  "The  Provost,  Vice- 
Provost,  and  Professors  of  the  College  and  Academy  of 
Philadelphia,  in  the  Province  of  Pennsylvania."  During 
those  first  years  of  its  history  the  institution  showed  a 
remarkable  growth.  In  1763  nearly  400  students  were 
enrolled  in  its  different  departments.  The  graduating 
class  of  that  year  contains  the  name  of  J.  Peter  Gabriel 
Muehlenberg.  Dr.  Smith,  who  was  recognized  as  the 
foremost  scholar  of  his  day  in  the  Province,  had  been 
called  by  Franklin  to  the  office  of  Provost  in  1755.     By 

*The  following  institutions  are  its  seniors  in  chronological  order: 
Harvard,  1636,  (Cambridge,  Mass.)  William  and  Mary,  1693,  (Williams- 
burg, Va.)  Yale,  1701,  (New  Haven,  Conn.)  Princeton,  the  College  of 
New  Jersey,  1746,  and  King's  College,  afterwards  Columbia,  1754, 
(City  of  New  York.) 
250 


1762-89.]  FOUNDING  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY.  25 1 

request  of  tlie  Trustees  he  went  abroad  in  1762  to  raise 
funds  for  the  College.  He  was  eminently  successful  in 
his  efforts,  securing  about  20,000  pounds  for  the  institu- 
tion. But  this  collecting  tour,  while  a  great  financial 
success,  tended  to  alienate  the  local  friends  of  the  insti- 
tution. Dr.  Smith  was  suspected  of  influencing  the  minds 
of  his  pupils  in  the  direction  of  his  own  political  and  re- 
ligious views.  Though  not  an  outspoken  Tory,  he  was 
known  to  be  opposed  to  separation  from  the  mother 
country.  This  roused  the  antagonism  of  the  General 
Assembly  against  the  College,  during  the  revolutionary 
struggle.  In  November,  1779,  the  Charter  of  the  Col- 
lege was  abrogated,  the  Provost,  Vice-Provost  and  Pro- 
fessors of  the  institution  were  removed  from  their  office 
and  their  rights  and  property  were  transferred  to  other 
hands.  The  College  was  henceforth  to  be  known  as  the 
University  of  Pennsylvania,  endowed  by  the  Assembly 
"with  an  annual  income  of  fifteen  hundred  pounds.  The 
new  Board  of  this  "University  of  Pennsylvania"  con- 
sisted of  three  classes  of  members:  i. — Certain  Govern- 
ment officers  as  ex-officio  members.  2. — The  Senior 
ministers  of  the  following  religious  denominations :  Epis- 
copalians, Presbyterians,  Lutherans,  German  Calvinists, 
Baptists  and  Roman  Catholics.  3. — Thirteen  individuals 
chosen  for  that  position,  like  Franklin,  Shippen,  F.  A. 
Muehlenberg  and  others.  Christopher  Kunze  was  the 
first  Lutheran  in  the  Board,  and  down  to  the  time  of  Dr. 
Chas.  W.  Schaefifer's  death  (1898)  the  Lutheran  Church 
has  been  represented  in  the  University's  Board  without 
interruption. 

In  July,  1784,  the  Trustees  of  the  former  College, 
Academy  and  Charity  Schools  memorialized  the  General 
Assembly,  complaining  of  the  act  of  1779  as  contrary  to 
the  constitution,  and  in  consequence  the  old  College  was 
restored  to  its  former  rights  (1789).  Thus  the  two  in- 
stitutions became  rivals  and  it  soon  was  made  manifest 


252  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVl. 

that  both  could  not  be  sustained  in  a  flourishing  condition. 
Consequently,  by  an  act  of  Legislature,  they  were  con- 
solidated under  the  name  of  the  University  of  Pennsyl- 
vania.    (September  30,  1791.) 

Dr.  Krauth  was  elected  Trustee  of  the  University,  on 
February  6,  1866;  Professor  of  Moral  and  Intellectual 
Philosophy,  November  3,  1868;  resigned  his  Trusteeship 
December  i,  1868,  and  was  elected  Vice-Provost,  June 
3,  1873,  and  Dean  of  the  Faculty  of  Philosophy,  Decem- 
ber 8,  1882. 

The  administration  of  Dr.  Chas.  J.  Stille,  as  Provost 
of  the  University,  (installed  September  30,  1868)  marks 
a  new  epoch  in  the  history  of  the  institution.  Under 
him  the  University  was  transferred  to  its  new  site  in 
West  Philadelphia,  and  the  first  new  buildings  were 
erected  and  opened  in  September,  1872.  "He  brought 
to  his  work  an  enthusiasm  which  inspired  enthusiasm,  a 
tireless  industry  and  persistence,  a  singleness  of  purpose 
and  an  unwearied  concentration  of  effort  which  sur- 
mounted the  most  formidable  obstacles."*  An  intimate 
friendship  was  formed  between  Dr.  Krauth  and  Dr. 
Stille  during  their  connection  with  the  University.  The 
Provost,  Dr.  Stille,  ungrudgingly  recognized  the  superior 
gifts  and  attainments  of  the  Vice-Provost,  Dr.  Krauth. 
"He  was  regarded  by  all  of  us,  his  colleagues,  as  our 
chief.  We  recognized  his  thorough  scholarship  and  his 
lofty  aims,  and  in  a  body  where  such  were  the  titles  to 
distinction,  he  was  recognized  as  facile  princcps.  For 
nearly  fourteen  years  he  was  not  merely  a  most  efficient 
colleague,  but  my  best  and  truest  adviser  and  friend.  I 
went  to  him  in  all  cases  of  difficulty  and  I  was  always 
strengthened  by  his  judicious  advice  and  warm  sympathy. 
He  always  encouraged  in  the  kindest  way  my  efforts  to 

*  Dr.  Krauth  in  his  address  at  the  inauguration  of  Provost  Pepper. 


1879-]  PARENTS  AND  COLLEGE  DISCIPLINE.  253 

advance  the  interests  of  the  University."     (Dr.  Chas.  J. 
Stille  to  Dr.  B.  M.  Schmucker.  September  9,  1883.) 

The  difficulties  to  vvrhich  Dr.  Stille  refers  in  his  tribute, 
concerned  particularly  the  true  relations  between  the 
teaching  and  governing  bodies  in  the  University,  and  the 
possible  danger  of  an  interference  with  College  discipline 
on  the  part  of  the  Trustees.  In  view  of  a  somewhat 
aggravated  case  which  occurred  in  those  days  in  the  Uni- 
versity, the  whole  question  of  Discipline,  its  relation  to 
parental  authority,  and  to  the  teaching  and  ruling  author- 
ities in  the  College,  was  thoroughly  considered  and  dis- 
cussed by  Dr.  Krauth,  both  in  private  letters  and  in  official 
reports.  The  views  entertained  by  him  deserve  the  at- 
tention of  all  educators  in  our  country  to  the  present 
day.  They  are  substantially  presented  in  full,  in  the 
following 

LETTER  OF  DR.   KRAUTH   TO  CHARLES  J.   STILLE.  LL.D. 

Provost  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania. 
4004  Pine  St.,  Philadelphia,  November  10,  1879. 

Dear  Sir  : — The  question  of  the  relation  of  parental 
authority,  to  the  discipline  of  the  University,  on  which 
you  have  done  me  the  honor  of  asking  me  to  express  an 
opinion,  is  a  very  vital  one.  In  principle  it  involves,  in 
one  of  its  phases,  the  question  wliether  we  shall  have  any 
discipline  at  all,  and  the  meaning  of  that  question  as  a 
finality  is,  whether  we  shall  continue  to  have  a  University. 
Impatience  of  authority  is  so  characteristic  a  weakness 
of  our  time  and  of  our  country,  that  the  discipline  of  our 
great  institutions  of  learning  is  with  difficulty  kept  up 
to  the  necessary  degree  of  strictness,  even  when  it  is 
sustained  bv  all  the  moral  supports  which  are  due  to  it. 
With  the  strongest  of  the  moral  forces  to  which  young 
men  pay  deference,  the  parental  authority,  antagonistic 
to  it,  and  claiming  and  exercising  even  tacitly,  a  superior- 
ity to  it,  or  a  power  to  restrict  it  either  in  its  demands  or 


254  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XVI. 

its  penalties,  the  discipline  of  a  University  would  become 
a  very  sorrowful  farce. 

When  a  young  man  accepts  the  privileges  of  the  Uni- 
versity he  subjects  himself  to  its  laws.     He  can  enter  the 
University  on  no  other  understanding.      While  he   re- 
mains in  the  University  he  is  bound  by  his  own  compact, 
made  with  the  approval  of  the  parent  who  sends  him,  to 
obey  these  rules.     While  the  rules  stand,  no  authority  can 
absolve  him  from  obedience  to  them.     The  professors 
claim  no  such  power,  the  Provost  claims  none,  the  Board 
of  Trustees  claim  none.     The  law  of  the  University  has 
no  limitations  except  those  which  it  embodies  in  its  own 
provisions.     The  law  is  specially  needed  to  protect  the 
institution  against  the  crudities  and  mischiefs  of  indi- 
vidual and  temporary  impulse.     There  is  a  power  which 
can  change  laws,  but  none  which  can  rightfully  violate 
them,  or  authorize  their  violation,  or  shield  those  who  have 
broken  them.     No  parent  can  authorize  his  son  to  break 
the  law  of  the  University,  or  control  in  any  degree  the 
discipline  by  which  the  authorities  think  it  necessary  to 
maintain  the  supremacy  of  law,  and  to  prevent  further 
violation  of  it.     A  father  can  remove  his  son  when  he 
pleases,  however  fatal  to  the  best  interests  of  that  son 
the  removal  may  be,  but  he  cannot  force  the  University 
to  continue  to  be  responsible  for  his  son's  education,  while 
he  robs  it  of  the  power  by  which  alone  that  responsibility 
can  be  fulfilled.    If  the  permission  of  a  parent  be  sufficient 
to  protect  a  student  from  discipline,  or  to  limit  its  extent 
in  one  case,  it  ought  to  be  sufficient  in  another  case  and, 
indeed,  in  all  cases.     This  would  virtually  involve  that 
the  parents,  or,  what  would  in  most  instances  be  really 
the  fact,  the  students,  through  the  parents,  should  be  the 
controlling  power  of  the  University.     The  question,  at 
bottom,  would  be,  whether  the  faculty  shall  rule  the  stu- 
dents, or  the  students  rule  the  faculty. 

These  principles  hold  with  peculiar  force  in  the  mat- 
ter of  regular  attendance.  The  difficulty  of  securing 
this  in  a  great  city,  where  the  students  do  not  board  in 
common   is  specially  great,  and  the  provisions  against 


i88o.]  PROVOST  AND   VICE-PROVOST.  255 

needless  absence  must,  of  necessity,  be  full,  the  penalties 
for  wanton  violation  must  be  sufficient  and  must  be  car- 
ried through  strictly  without  fear  or  favor.  University 
law  both  as  to  provision  and  penalty  must,  in  its  own 
sphere,  be  supreme.  It  not  only  is  so,  but  of  right  ought 
to  be.  The  existing  University  law  is  not  extreme  in 
either,  and  any  relaxation  of  it  would  be  disastrous. 
The  University  law  now  embodies  the  greatest  amount 
of  gentleness  consistent  with  safety.  It  is  paternal  rather 
than  legal,  moral  rather  than  coercive,  calculated  to  aid 
rather  than  to  weaken  paternal  authority,  and  the  home 
which  impairs  its  efficiency,  is  fostering  in  its  own  sons 
a  spirit  which  will  re-act  against  domestic  peace. 
Believe  me  very  truly  yours. 

C.  P.  Krauth. 

In  September,  1880,  Dr.  Chas.  J.  Stille  resigned  the 
office  of  Provost  and  Dr.  Krauth  on  his  return  from 
Europe  (October  7,  1880)  had  at  once  to  assume  the 
duties  of  acting  Provost.  He  gave  so  much  satisfaction 
in  the  discharge  of  these  duties,  that  his  colleagues  in 
the  faculty  unanimously  petitioned  the  Trustees  to  elect 
him  Provost.  But  the  Board  decided  to  leave  on  Dr. 
Krauth's  shoulders  the  burden  of  the  most  arduous  la- 
bors of  the  Provost,  without  conferring  on  him  the  honor 
of  the  office. 

A  Committee  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  Uni- 
versity had  prepared  a  report,  proposing  a  new  plan 
of  organization.  The  plan  was  submitted  to  Dr.  Krauth 
by  the  Hon.  Frederick  Fraley,  LL.D.,  and  his  opinion 
was  solicited.  Dr.  Krauth  gave  the  most  careful  exam- 
ination to  this  important  and  far-reaching  subject,  and 
in  a  letter  to  Mr.  Fraley  of  December,  1880,  printed  for 
the  members  of  the  Committee  and  the  Board,  frankly 
criticized  that  part  of  the  new  plan  which  had  reference 
to  the  Vice-Provostship.  The  Committee  recommended 
that  "in  the  future  many  of  the  executive,  supervisory, 


256  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVl. 

and  disciplinary  duties  heretofore  discharged  iby  the 
Provost  may  be  delegated  to  the  Vice-Provost,  under  the 
sanction  of  the  Board  of  Trustees."  These  duties  were 
to  be  demitted  by  the  Board  of  Trustees  to  the  Vice- 
Provost  "under  the  control  and  authority  of  the  Provost." 

The  proposed  plan,  said  Dr.  Krauth,  makes  a  com- 
plete revolution  in  the  character  of  the  Vice-Provost- 
ship,  as  established  and  confirmed  by  the  charters, 
statutes,  by-laws,  and  history  of  the  University  from  its 
foundation  to  this  hour.  .  .  .The  Vice-Provost  is  not,  as 
such,  an  aid  to  the  Provost,  not  one  who  divides  his 
duties  with  him  or  relieves  him  of  his  burdens,  but  who, 
in  certain  supposed  conjunctures,  takes  his  place.  .  .  .He 
is  directly  responsible  to  the  Board,  and  is  in  no  sense 
"under  the  control  and  authority  of  the  Provost."  In 
the  presence  of  the  Provost,  on  duty,  the  Vice-Provost 
stands  in  the  common  relation  of  all  the  professors  to 
him,  and  has  no  distinctive  control  and  authority;  when, 
and  only  when,  the  Provost  is  absent,  or  the  office  is 
vacant,  do  the  powers  of  the  Vice-Provost  come  into 
play.  At  all  other  times  they  are  in  mere  potential  abey- 
ance. They  embrace  in  actual  exercise  all  the  control 
and  all  the  authority  which  belong  to  the  Provost  when 
the  organization  is  in  its  normal  completeness ....  The 
Vice-Provost  under  the  new  plan  is  not  Vice-Provost  of 
the  University,  but  the  Vice-Provost  of  the  Provost,  a 
purely  personal  aid  of  the  Provost,  relieving  him  of  a 
certain  part  of  his  specified  work,  but  with  no  authority 
of  any  proper  kind,  and  with  no  direct  official  relation  to 
the  Board ....  The  plan  is  not  an  enlargement  of  the  old 
office,  but  the  destruction  of  the  old  office  and  the  crea- 
tion of  a  new  one.  The  practical  difficulty  of  acting  un- 
der it  would  invite  constant  trouble,  and  the  most  op- 
posite constructions  might  honestly  be  put  upon  the 
powers  it  actually  confers. 

Dr.  Krauth  acutely  and  correctly  foresaw  how  the 
actual  working  of  the  new  plan  would  affect  his  own 


i88o-8i.]  INAUGURATION   OF  DR.  PEPPER.  257 

work  in  the  University.  He  succeeded  to  nearly  every- 
thing which  made  any  serious  demands  on  the  time  of 
Ex-Provost  Stille,  in  the  internal  administration  of  the 
University,  while  he  had  a  larger  share  in  the  direct 
work  of  teaching,  than  either  Dr.  Stille  or  Dr.  Pepper 
ever  had.  His  daily  duties  as  Chaplain,  the  examination 
into  all  the  absences  in  the  Department  of  Arts ;  the  ad- 
ministration of  discipline,  by  direction  of  the  Faculty, 
the  giving  of  counsel  where  needed,  the  correspondence 
with  parents,  the  preparation  of  special  reports,  the  re- 
ception and  other  preliminary  steps  in  the  applications 
for  scholarships,  a  general  watchfulness  over  the  inter- 
ests of  the  institution,  with  a  host  of  duties,  at  once  too 
trifling  and  too  numerous  for  specification, — these  all 
were  added  to  what  strictly  belonged  to  the  Vice-Provost- 
ship  and  made  such  serious  demands  on  his  time  that 
he  was  temporarily  compelled  to  cut  down  his  time  at 
the  Seminary,  and  to  decline  remunerative  engagements 
as  a  writer. 

Nevertheless,  without  murmuring,  he  assumed  and 
faithfully  performed  the  duties  of  acting  Provost,  with 
the  additional  labor  imposed  upon  him.  And  at  the 
inauguration  of  Dr.  Wm.  Pepper  (February  22.  1881) 
he  welcomed  the  new  Provost,  the  main  burden  of  whose 
office  he  was  henceforth  to  bear,  in  a  remarkably  tactful 
and  generous  address,  from  which  we  present  the  follow- 
ing points  : 

Whatever  relative  efficiency  the  best  temporary  ar- 
rangements may  have,  they  involve,  in  some  degree  at 
least,  a  pause.  The  pulse  of  the  machine  beats  more 
slowly.  Expectancy  is  impotency.  Inter-regna,  vice- 
regencies,  and  all  provisional  governments  are  charac- 
teristically weak.  A  body  needs  one  head ;  and  that  head 
must  be  firmly  united  with  it,  not  by  mechanical,  but  by 
vital  bonds ....  Our  Trustees  have  given  us  as  Provost 
a  native  of  the  State  for  whose  advantage  first,  though 

17 


258  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

not  alone,  our  University  was  established.  They  have 
given  us  a  native  of  the  city  for  which  our  University 
has  done  so  much,  and  which  has  so  vital  a  stake  in  her 
prosperity.  Our  Provost  comes  to  the  service  of  his 
Alma  Mater ....  Our  local  feeling  is  gratified  the  more 
because  local  feeling  had  no  illicit  influence  in  the  choice. 
The  besetting  sin  of  Philadelphia  lies  in  the  contrary 
direction.  She  is  often  the  last  to  recognize  the  merit 
of  her  own  citizens.  Residence  in  her  midst  seems  al- 
most a  barrier  to  the  honors  she  confers.  She  forgets 
her  children  who  deserve  well  of  her,  and  wonders  why 
other  places  have  so  many  more  men  of  renown.  The 
fame  of  her  sons  comes  to  her  as  an  echo,  and  the  echo 
must  be  very  clear,  before  she  deigns  to  notice  it 

Great  Universities  are  stupendous  charities,  and  in  one 
sense  the  greater  they  are,  the  more  they  cost,  the  more 
they  need  and  the  less  they  pay.  They  are  not  meant  to 
make  money,  but  to  make  men,  and  no  University  can 
make  both.  The  University  that  deals,  or  is  dealt  with, 
in  a  niggardly  way,  will  do  neither. 

The  Faculties  welcome  their  new  Provost  because  in 
the  changes  demanded  for  his  official  position  he  em- 
bodies great  concessions  to  a  need  imperatively  felt,  and 
long  and  urgently  pressed, — the  need  of  a  better  organi- 
zation in  respect  to  the  relations  of  the  Board  and  the 
Faculties.  ...  A  Board  may  come  to  look  upon  the  Facul- 
ties almost  as  if  they  were  its  personal  servants.  A 
Faculty  may  come  to  look  upon  a  Board  as  if  a  Board 
were  a  mere  contrivance  for  the  supply  of  temporal 
means.  "We  employ  you  to  do  work  for  us," — sums  up 
the  impression  upon  the  one  side.  "You  pay  us  for  our 
work," — is  the  tacit  explanation  of  the  bond  on  the  other. 
The  result  is  a  hiring  body,  and  a  body  of  hirelings.  The 
Faculty  of  a  University  is  its  soul — but  without  a  Board 
of  Trustees  it  might  be  a  disembodied  soul,  or  a  soul 
without  enough  body  to  cover  it  decently.  A  University 
depends  at  last  upon  its  Faculties.  No  buildings  or  en- 
dowments can  be  vast  enough  and  rich  enough  to  com- 
pensate for  the  want  of  able  and  devoted  teachers.     A 


1868-83.]  IN   THE  CLASS-ROOM.  259 

Chapel  of  St.  Ursula  is  not  a  University,  however  sym- 
metrical may  be  the  arrangement  of  its  empty  skulls,  or 
artistic  the  grouping  of  its  dry  bones.  It  is  impossible 
to  create  living  Universities  out  of  dead  professors.  Here 
at  least  the  theory  of  spontaneous  generation  will  not 
hold.     Nothing  but  life  evokes  life. 

DR.  KRAUTH  AMONG  THE  STUDENTS. 

One  of  his  brightest  pupils,  who  afterward  became 
his  successor  in  the  chair  of  Moral  and  Intellectual 
Philosophy  at  the  University,  Dr.  George  S.  Fullerton, 
describes  this  side  of  Dr.  Krauth's  work  at  the  Uni- 
versity, as  follows : 

The  work  done  by  Dr.  Krauth  as  Professor  of  Intel- 
lectual and  Moral  Philosophy,  and  as  Vice-Provost  of  the 
University  of  Pennsylvania,  the  influence  of  his  learning, 
his  patience,  his  kindliness  and  courtesy  upon  the  suc- 
cessive classes  of  young  men,  who  for  fourteen  years  sat 
under  his  teaching,  cannot  but  be  regarded  as  a  most 
important  part  of  the  work  of  his  eminently  active  and 
useful  life. 

Those  who  are  familiar  with  the  development  of  the 
intellectual  life  in  the  brighter  minds  among  the  stu- 
dents of  our  Colleges,  know  well,  that  the  time  when 
the  mind  is  first  awakened  to  something  like  real  thought, 
is  a  time  when  a  thousand  questions  present  themselves 
for  solution,  questions  which  one  has  never  before  asked 
himself,  and  which  are  more  readily  asked  than  answered ; 
it  is  a  time  of  unsettling,  of  troubled  doubt,  a  passing 
away  of  the  old,  while,  as  yet,  one  has  not  attained  to 
the  new.  And  since,  to  quote  the  words  of  Dr.  Krauth 
himself,  "ignorance  is  neither  innocence  nor  virtue,"  it 
is  desirable  that  such  a  time  should  come,  and  that  one 
should  rise  from  the  unquestioning  faith  of  thoughtless- 
ness, to  the  deeper  and  firmer  faith  which  is  the  result  of 
difficulties  met  and  conquered,  of  questions  asked  and 
answered.     It  would  argue  a  great  lack  of  intellectual 


26o  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chav.XYL 

vigor  on  the  part  of  the  student,  or  poor  instruction  on 
the  part  of  the  teacher,  if  the  meeting  for  the  first  time 
with  these  absorbing  questions  of  metaphysics  or  ethics 
did  not  produce  a  mental  fermentation,  an  activity  of 
thought  and  of  inquiry,  which  must  modify  more  or  less 
deeply  the  whole  mental  life.  This  new  life  is  not  a  dis- 
ease, but  a  growth,  it  is  not  to  be  repressed,  but  fostered, 
and  yet,  a  blessing  in  itself,  it  is  not  without  its  dangers. 
It  was  upon  young  men  in  this  state  of  their  intellectual 
life,  that  Dr.  Krauth  made  his  influence  felt.  It  was 
not  his  learning  alone  that  gave  him  the  power  which 
he  had,  broad  as  that  learning  was,  but  certain  other 
qualities  of  mind  and  character,  without  which,  his  in- 
fluence would  have  been  incomparably  less.  Of  all  his 
qualities,  that  one  which  perhaps  impressed  itself  most 
strongly  upon  those  whom  he  taught,  and  gave  weight 
to  his  words,  was  his  thorough  honesty — his  truthfulness, 
a  quality  by  no  means  so  common  among  teachers  as  it 
might  be,  and  one  which  young  men  are  always  ready  to 
recognize  and  respect.  How  natural  for  a  teacher  who 
has  at  heart  the  good  of  his  pupils,  and  who  fears  the 
pernicious  effect  of  some  skeptical  book  or  writer,  to  do 
injustice  to  the  volume,  represent  unfairly  and  without 
their  true  force  the  arguments  presented,  or  speak  slight- 
ingly of  the  author  as  a  man  of  no  ability,  as  wilfully 
and  blindly  in  error,  as  one  desirous  of  doing  harm.  But 
young  men  who  have  been  influenced  by  the  arguments 
of  a  dangerous  writer  are  not  to  be  disenchanted  by  abus- 
ing that  writer,  a  process  which  will  only  confirm  them 
in  their  opinion  of  his  power ;  and  an  undue  severity  in 
speaking  of  an  opponent,  merely  weakens  the  force  of 
opinion.  In  his  early  life  Dr.  Krauth  was  perhaps  too 
fond  of  sarcasm  as  a  weapon,  but  at  the  time  of  his  work 
at  the  University,  his  character  had  ripened  into  that 
sweetness  and  broad  Christian  charity  which  enabled  him 
to  speak  with  justice  of  an  opponent,  however  dangerous, 
who  was  sincere  and  earnest,  reserving  his  scorn  for  that 
baseness  of  life  and  character  censured  by  men  of  what- 
ever creed  or  speculative  views.     It  was  this  which  made 


1868-83.]  QUESTIONS   FAIRLY   MET.  261 

his  opinions  on  men  and  books  valued  by  his  pupils, — 
the  conviction  that  he  spoke,  not  from  policy,  but  his 
sincere  belief.  Those  who  were  in  his  class  a  few  years 
since,  when  a  student  who,  having  read  some  of  the 
works  of  Mr.  Bain,  and  being  much  troubled  by  the  force 
of  his  reasonings,  asked  Dr.  Krauth  what  he  thought  of 
the  argument  and  of  the  man,  will  not  forget  the  tenor 
of  what  he  said,  as  compared  with  the  way  in  which  he 
shortly  after  spoke  of  another  philosopher.  "I  consider 
Mr.  Bain,"  said  he,  "a  very  able  man,  and  a  very  learned 
man,  but  I  think  he  is  mistaken  in  several  important 
points;"  and  then  he  set  forth  with  fairness  and  justice, 
and  without  any  personal  reflections  on  the  character  or 
intentions  of  Mr.  Bain,  the  points  in  which  he  regarded 
his  philosophy  as  in  error.  How  different  was  the 
warmth  with  which  he  spoke  in  referring  to  the  life  of 
another  writer  under  discussion: — "He  was  a  man  of 
thoroughly  selfish  life,  a  sensualist,  a  libertine,  a  man  of 
base  character;"  spoken  in  such  a  way,  as  to  impress 
upon  the  student  the  truth  of  one  fact,  that  a  selfish, 
sensual,  base  life  deserves  the  contempt  of  men  of  all 
creeds  and  all  philosophies. 

In  his  teaching  Dr.  Krauth  never  refused  to  answer 
a  question,  indeed,  he  encouraged  perfect  freedom  of  dis- 
cussion in  the  classroom.  And  if  he  were  in  doubt  as 
to  the  true  answer  to  a  question,  he  never  hesitated  to 
confess  at  once  his  ignorance,  a  confession  which,  how- 
ever, he  was  seldom  called  upon  to  make,  as  the  wide 
extent  of  his  reading,  not  merely  in  philosophy,  but  in 
natural  history  and  general  literature,  and  the  accuracy 
of  his  memory,  were  a  constant  surprise  to  those  whom 
he  taught.  He  used  to  say  that  if  one's  mental  develop- 
ment were  such  as  to  prompt  him  to  ask  a  question,  he 
was  sufficiently  advanced  to  receive  a  true  answer.  And 
though  he  did  not  believe  that  all  truth  is  good  for  all 
persons,  nor  that  one  should  suggest  doubts  to  those  who 
have  none,  he  held  that  when  a  doubt  does  rise,  it  should 
be  faced,  that  shutting  one's  eyes  is  neither  courageous, 
nor  satisfactory  as  a  means  of  exorcism.     Acting  con- 


262  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Cuat.XYL 

sistently  on  this  principle  in  his  intercourse  with  his  pu- 
pils, he  inspired  in  them  that  confidence  in  his  sincerity 
which  has  been  mentioned  as  so  important  an  element  in 
his  power. 

It  was  Dr.  Krauth's  lot  to  teach  what  is  usually  con- 
sidered by  College  students  a  "dry"  branch.  Indeed, 
there  are  so  few  of  them  that  ever  get  deep  enough  in 
the  subject  to  see  its  significance,  that  it  is  hardly  to  be 
expected  that  they  should  take  an  interest  in  it.  This 
class  a  teacher  much  reach  rather  through  his  personality 
than  through  his  philosophy;  and  those  who  were  incap- 
able of  understanding  the  force  of  his  arguments,  or 
the  value  of  his  philosophical  analyses,  yet  could  learn 
and  did  learn  from  Dr.  Krauth,  whose  whole  intercourse 
with  the  students  was  a  lesson  in  practical  ethics.  Teach- 
ing of  this  sort,  those  most  inappreciative  of  the  abstrac- 
tions of  metaphysics  could  understand  and  appreciate. 
But  his  wide  range  of  reading  and  his  excellent  memory 
furnished  him  with  a  fund  of  illustrations  and  examples 
which  served  to  make  interesting  discussions  which  would 
otherwise  have  been  dry  to  many, — novels,  poetry, 
travels,  all  contributed  their  quota.  In  speaking  of  the 
intelligence  of  the  brute  creation,  for  example,  and  tak- 
ing the  dog  as  a  representative — for  he  was  always  fond 
of  talking  about  dogs — he  would  refer  to  the  scene  in 
Oliver  Twist,  where  Bill  Sykes  is  represented  as  having 
made  up  his  mind  to  kill  his  faithful  follower.  As  he 
approaches  the  animal  with  this  intent,  it  seems  to  guess 
his  purpose  from  his  face,  and,  contrary  to  all  precedent, 
it  avoids  him,  and  takes  care  to  keep  out  of  his  reach. 
This  incident,  the  Doctor  used  to  maintain,  is  not  an  exag- 
geration of  canine  intelligence.  Indeed,  the  affectionate 
way  in  which  he  talked  of  dogs,  used  to  remind  those 
listening  to  him  of  Dr.  John  Brown,  of  Edinburgh,  and 
his  love  for  our  humble  friends. 

Or,  in  speaking  of  the  intelligence  or  instinct  of  the 
lower  orders  of  life,  he  would  refer  to  his  own  exper- 
ience in  the  West  Indies;  his  morning  walk  along  the 
seashore,  in  which  he  discovered  that  a  slight  tap  with 


1868-83.]  ILLUSTRATION  AND  ANECDOTE.  263 

a  cane  would  detach  an  unexpectant  shellfish  from  a  rock, 
but  that,  if  it  were  first  touched  and  warning  of  danger 
given,  it  would  hold  on  with  might  and  main. 

The  witty  man  in  Lothair  says  it  is  always  a  pity  "when 
conversation  falls  into  its  anecdotage,"  and  anecdotes 
told  for  their  own  sake,  are  possibly  entertaining,  but 
not  very  instructive  nor  edifying.  With  Dr.  Krauth  the 
anecdote  had  its  point,  and  from  its  connection  with  the 
argument,  proved  its  right  to  exist. 

The  genuine  humor,  and  occasional  flashes  of  wit  with 
W'hich  he  enlivened  the  classroom  will  be  remembered  by 
his  pupils.  On  one  occasion  a  student  who  had  just  seen 
in  the  newspapers  a  report  of  a  remarkable  case  of 
trance-life,  and  wished  Dr.  Krauth's  opinion  respecting 
it,  propounded  the  question,  "Doctor,  the  papers  say, 
there  is  a  woman  in  New  York  who  has  been  insensible, 
and  has  not  eaten  or  drunk  anything  for  twenty  years, — ■ 
do  you  believe  it?"  "I  can  well  believe  that,  Mr.  C,  our 
graveyards  are  full  of  such  people."  "Oh,  but  I  mean, 
she  is  alive,"  hastily  added  the  student.  "Well,  I  don't 
believe  that,"  said  Dr.  Krauth,  "that  puts  a  new  face  on 
the  matter." 

His  wit  had  sometimes  a  very  salutary  sting,  and  was 
an  effectual  stimulant.  In  examining  a  student  on  some 
lectures,  in  which  he  had  dwelt  at  some  length  on  the 
wonderful  instinct  of  the  bee,  as  shown  in  the  formation 
of  its  cells,  he  asked  what  is  the  shape  of  a  bee's  cell,  and 
received  the  answer,  "Square."  "Oh  no,  Mr.  M.," 
quietly  said  Dr.  Krauth,  "the  bee's  cell  is  not  square :  I 
think  you  had  better  go  and  look  at  the  bee, — but  per- 
haps it  would  be  as  well  for  you  to  go  first  to  the  ant." 

It  was  his  custom  to  call  upon  a  student  to  recite  from 
the  beginning,  middle  or  end  of  the  roll,  and  the  place 
where  he  would  commence  could  not  be  predicted.  But, 
having  begun,  he  would  go  on  in  regular  order  from 
one  name  to  the  next,  and  the  trepidation  of  those  who 
had  neglected  to  prepare  the  lesson  or  had  found  them- 
selves unequal  to  the  task,  and  who  saw  their  turn  com- 
ing, was  sometimes  amusingly  evident.    If  the  hour  were 


264       CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Cuw.XVl. 

drawing  near  its  end,  an  attempt  might  be  made  to  ward 
off  the  impending  evil,  by  asking  questions,  which  would 
have  to  be  answered  at  length,  and  would  take  up  the 
time  until  the  ringing  of  the  bell.  On  one  such  occasion, 
a  student  who  saw  himself  in  danger  and  was  not  suf- 
ficiently at  home  in  the  subject  to  ask  an  intelligent  ques- 
tion, turned  in  desperation  to  his  neighbor:  "Quick!  he 
is  coming  this  way,  tell  me  a  question  to  ask  him."  The 
other  suggested  that  he  ask  the  Doctor  to  tell  the  class 
something  about  Simon's  views  on  the  subject  of  special 
providences — a  request  which  he  at  once  made,  but  not 
catching  the  name  of  the  writer  distinctly,  he  was  com- 
pelled to  mumble  it.  "Did  you  say  Sismondi?"  inquired 
Dr.  Krauth.  "Yes,  sir,"  rejoined  the  querist,  whose  pur- 
pose was  equally  well  served  by  either.  Having  declared 
his  ignorance  as  to  Sismondi's  views  on  the  subject,  Dr. 
Krauth  proceeded  to  call  upon  the  student  to  recite,  and 
as  a  result  was  compelled  to  credit  him  with  a  complete 
failure.  "Mr.  C,"  said  he  quietly,  "if  I  were  you,  I 
would  not  let  my  enthusiastic  studies  in  Sismondi  so  en- 
croach upon  my  time  as  to  leave  none  for  my  regular 
lesson  in  philosophy." 

There  was  nothing  dogmatic  or  authoritative  in  his 
method  of  teaching.  Recognizing  the  fact  that  in  meta- 
physics, if  anywhere,  a  difference  of  opinion  is  to  be 
tolerated,  and  that  the  value  of  the  instruction  is  not  in 
the  number  of  truths  inculcated  so  much  as  in  the  stim- 
ulus to  thought,  and  interest  in  high  subjects,  he  en- 
couraged a  freedom  of  inquiry,  and  always  allowed  one 
to  maintain  his  opinion  by  argument.  The  patience  with 
which  he  would  meet  a  pupil  on  his  own  ground,  answer- 
ing kindly  questions  absurd  in  themselves,  though  pro- 
posed in  good  faith,  could  not  but  be  admired  by  those 
who  sat  under  his  teaching.  As  an  instance  to  the  point 
will  be  remembered  his  kindly  discussion  with  the  stu- 
dent who  tried  to  explain  the  intelligence  of  the  dog,  on 
the  principle  of  "the  absorption  of  the  psychic." 

In  his  classroom  there  was  a  feeling  of  freedom,  widely 
removed  from  the  unwarranted  freedom  of  disrespect, 


1868-83.]  HIS    KINDLY    COURTESY.  265 

which  helped  to  reheve  the  monotony  of  discussions  for 
many  uninteresting  because  not  understood.  Dr.  Krauth 
did  not  require  in  the  classroom  an  absolute  silence  or 
stillness,  and  if,  when  the  subject  was  too  deep  for  many 
of  those  present,  the  buzz  of  conversation  became  au- 
dible, he  would  gently  remind  the  class  that  they  were 
forgetting  themselves,  and  at  once  order  would  be  re- 
stored. 

On  occasion  he  could  be  severe,  but  the  trifling  mis- 
demeanours of  the  classroom  arise  much  oftener  from 
thoughtlessness  and  a  superabundance  of  animal  spirits, 
than  from  intentional  disrespect,  and  this  he  always  took 
into  account.  A  student,  who  had  troubled  him  by  con- 
tinuous conversation  with  his  neighbor,  was  after  one 
or  two  slight  warnings  called  up  to  the  desk  one  day  after 
recitation.  "Mr.  R.,"  said  Dr.  Krauth,  "I  should  dislike 
very  much  to  spoil  the  grade  of  a  man  who  recites  so 
well  as  you  do;  don't  you  think  you  could  talk  less  dur- 
ing recitations?"  The  man  was  a  good  scholar,  but  had 
been  thoughtless,  and  the  kindly  reproof  served  its  pur- 
pose, and  made  a  lasting  impression. 

Dr.  Krauth  would  never  have  been  called  severe  in 
the  classroom,  he  was  too  gentle  to  be  severe,  and  yet  he 
kept  excellent  order.  There  was  a  dignity  in  his  presence 
which  made  rudeness  impossible,  and  a  kindliness  and 
courtesy  which  disarmed  everything  like  opposition.  This 
characterized  all  his  intercourse  with  the  students, 
whether  as  professor  or  as  Vice-Provost.  He  would 
listen  to  the  excuse  for  absence  presented  by  a  Freshman 
with  the  same  polished  courtesy  with  which  he  would 
listen  to  a  professor.  As  an  instance  of  his  kindly  humor, 
and  uniform  courtesy,  may  be  related  the  story  told  by 
the  colored  assistant  janitor,  of  the  way  in  which  Dr. 
Krauth  called  his  attention  to  the  fact  that  he  had  not 
kept  clean  the  large  inkstand  on  his  desk.  It  seems,  a 
number  of  flies  had  fallen  into  the  ink,  and  had  made  it 
unfit  for  use.  "Alfred,"  said  Dr.  Krauth,  "I  am  sure, 
ink  is  not  the  natural  element  of  those  poor  flies.  Don't 
you  think  they  would  be  more  comfortable  if  restored 


266  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

to  their  native  atmosphere?''  The  inkstand  was  kept 
clean  after  that. 

A  chance  chat  with  Dr.  Krauth  after  hours,  a  meeting 
on  the  street  or  in  the  cars,  was  prized  as  a  treat.  He 
set  the  student  at  his  ease  at  once,  and  whether  the  sub- 
ject were  a  question  in  philosophy,  or  the  merit  of  a 
standard  novel,  his  information  seemed  equally  exact, 
and  his  mode  of  imparting  it  equally  agreeable.  Stu- 
dents generally  expect  to  find  a  certain  fossil-like  char- 
acter in  an  old  teacher, — rather  expect  him  to  be  out  of 
sympathy  with  their  boyish  enthusiasm  over  matters,  to 
others  than  themselves,  of  little  moment.  But  Dr. 
Krauth,  in  the  many  years  since  his  own  college  course, 
had  not  managed  to  secrete  enough  silex  to  make  a  stu- 
dent ill  at  ease  in  his  company,  or  unable  to  talk  freely 
with  him  over  the  small  concerns  of  college  life.  Those 
who  were  members  of  the  Philomathean  Society  (an  old- 
established  literary  club,  meeting  weekly  at  its  rooms  in 
the  University  for  the  purpose  of  debate,  etc.,)  when  he 
was  elected  a  judge  in  the  yearly  prize  contests,  will  re- 
member the  real  interest  he  seemed  to  take  in  the  efforts 
of  the  students,  the  gravity  with  which  he  listened  to 
their  discussion  of  deep  themes,  and  the  kindly  way  in 
which  he  announced  the  result  of  the  judges'  decision, 
putting  it  so  that  no  one  who  had  contested  should  feel 
hurt  at  his  failure  to  take  the  prize. 

And  after  the  contests,  the  pleasant  hour  which  he 
spent  in  the  Society's  library,  conversing  with  the  mem- 
bers, inquiring  into  the  affairs  of  the  Society,  now  and 
then  telling  an  amusing  anecdote — which  he  did  capitally, 
or  perpetrating  a  pun, — and  he  was  the  father  of  some 
execrable  puns, — was  abundant  evidence  of  the  real  in- 
terest he  took  in  his  pupils  and  their  doings. 

Those  of  his  pupils  who  kept  up  their  intercourse  with 
him  after  graduation,  and  had  the  good  fortune  to  be 
honored  with  his  friendship,  must  value  most  highly  the 
stimulus  for  scholarly  attainment,  and  the  elevation  of 
sentiment  with  which  one  could  not  but  become  imbued 
by  an  association   with   this   true   scholar   and   cultured 


1868-83.]       ENCOURAGEMEXT   TO    YO'JNG  MEX.  267 

gentleman.  In  a  land  wliere  material  prosperity  is  too 
often  regarded  as  the  one  thing  needful,  where  a  narrow 
utility  sets  its  value  upon  each  branch  of  study,  he  im- 
pressed upon  the  younger  men  who  conversed  with  him 
the  truth,  that  the  worth  of  a  scholar's  work  is  not  to  be 
measured  by  its  convertibility  into  dollars  and  cents,  but 
that  a  devotion  to  learning  for  its  own  sake  will  bring  a 
peculiar  reward  of  its  own.  He  welcomed  his  young 
friends  to  his  study,  and  placed  at  their  service  his  li- 
brary. He  took  pleasure  in  directing  them  to  the  best 
books  by  the  best  authors,  and,  busy  as  he  was,  seemed 
not  only  willing  but  glad  to  sit  down  and  spend  an  hour 
in  talking  over  the  subject  into  which  he  had  led  them. 
He  greeted  with  that  hearty  commendation  and  encour- 
agement, which  none  knew  better  than  he  how  to  give, 
the  early  literary  efforts  of  young  scholars, — an  en- 
couragement, which,  coming  from  a  source  so  highly 
honored,  gave  hope  and  vigor  for  further  effort.  Sus- 
cessful  as  was  Dr.  Krauth's  work  among  the  students  at 
large,  deep  as  was  the  influence  of  his  character  and 
learning  upon  his  classes,  it  was  in  personal  contact  with 
him  in  his  study  and  among  his  books  that  he  was  best 
known,  and  that  his  influence  was  deepest.  It  is  difficult 
to  speak  with  sufficient  warmth  of  his  uniform  kindness 
and  courtesy,  his  hearty  encouragement  and  assistance, 
to  younger  scholars,  who  will  look  upon  their  acquain- 
tance with  him  as  a  most  valuable  factor  in  their  intel- 
lectual lives. 

DR.    KRAUTH    AS   A   TEACHER    OF    PHILOSOPHY. 

The  Rev.  Geo.  C.  F.  Haas,  D.D.,  Pastor  of  St.  Mark's 
German  Lutheran  Church  in  New  York,  and,  for  many 
years  President  of  the  New  York  Synod,  furnishes  the 
following  description  of  Dr.  Krautli's  method  in  teach- 
ing Moral  and  Intellectual  Philosophy  at  the  University 
of  Pennsylvania : 

At  our  first  meeting  with  Dr.  Krauth  as  a  class  in 
Philosophy  (1874)  he  instructed  us  to  procure  "Outlines 


368  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

of  Sir  William  Hamilton's  Philosophy,  by  Murray," 
"Whewell's  Elements  of  Morality"  and  "Krauth's  Flem- 
ing's Vocabulary  of  Philosophy."*  The  latter  we  used 
only  as  a  work  of  private  reference,  the  former  two  we 
took  up  in  the  order  mentioned,  taking  only  selected  por- 
tions of  Whewell's  Elements  (embracing  the  elementary 
notions  of  morality  and  the  chapter  on  Polity,  more 
especially  the  rights,  duties  and  moral  character  of  the 
state,  the  social  contract,  the  constitution,  and  representa- 
tive government)  whilst  we  studied  Hamilton's  Psychol- 
ogy in  detail.  Dr.  Krauth's  method  was  to  give  us  a 
number  of  pages  to  commit  and  recite  upon.  He  did  not 
require  a  verbatim  memorizing  of  the  text,  but  insisted 
on  our  closely  adhering  to  the  ideas  presented.  Where, 
indeed,  a  student  began  to  ramble,  or  failed  to  express 
himself  clearly,  the  Doctor  would  ofttimes  inquire  after 
the  precise  words  of  the  author,  it  being  an  oft  repeated 
saying  of  his,  that  the  author's  meaning  could  be  best 

*A  Vocabulary  of  the  Philosophical  Sciences.  (Including  the 
Vocabulary  of  Philosophy,  Mental,  Moral  and  Metaphysical,  by 
William  Fleming  D.  D.,  Professor  of  Moral  Philosophy  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Glasgow,  from  the  second  edition,  i860;  and  the  third, 
1876,  edited  by  Henry  Calderwood  LL.  D.)  By  Charles  P.  Krauth 
S.  T.  D.  LL.  D.,  Vice-Provost  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania, 
Pp.  XXIV.,  1044,  New  York :  Sheldon  and  Co.,  1878.  Fleming's 
Vocabulary,  a  standard  English  work  of  reference,  had  been  edited 
by  Dr.  Krauth  for  the  first  time,  and  introduced  to  the  American 
student  of  philosophy  in  1S60.  The  edition  of  1878  was  the  first  com- 
plete American  edition  of  the  work,  preserving  what  Calderwood  had 
omitted.  Dr.  Krauth's  additions  from  page  561  to  1044  just  about 
double  the  volume  of  the  book  and  much  more  than  double  its  value. 
In  the  sphere  of  German  philosophy,  where  Fleming  was  most 
unsatisfactory  Dr.  Krauth's  additions  and  particularly  his  English 
renderings  of  German  philosophical  terms,  are  invaluable.  But  the 
combination  of  "  two  works  by  two  writers,  closely  related,  yet  distinct" 
as  Dr.  Krauth  himself  says  in  his  preface,  makes  the  whole  publication 
rather  clumsy,  and  it  might  well  be  asked  whether  it  would  not  have 
been  better  if  he  had  written  a  book  of  his  own,  incorporating  the 
best  of  Fleming's  material.  See  also  Dr.  Robert  Ellis  Thompson's 
review  in  Penn  Monthly,  November  1877. 


1868-83.]  THOROUGHNESS   AND   ACCURACY.  269 

given  in  his  own  words.  He  would  lay  great  stress  on 
our  knowing  the  table  of  contents,  order  of  chapters  and 
subjects  of  a  book,  and  often  had  the  mere  skeleton  of 
chapter-headings  and  the  like,  recited  and  re-recited.  As 
long  as  the  student  would  continue  to  recite  with  any 
fluency  at  all.  Dr.  Krauth  would  but  rarely  interrupt  him, 
even  when  he  made  some  mistakes,  so  that  it  often  hap- 
pened that  one  of  the  brighter  students  would  recite  the 
whole  eight,  ten  or  twelve  pages  of  the  lesson,  in  which 
case  the  next  one  would  be  called  upon  to  begin  from  the 
beginning  again.  Very  often,  when  the  whole  subject 
had  been  explained  and  recited,  the  Doctor  would  have 
one  or  two  students  summarize  it  again,  or  have  them 
review  chapters.  When  a  student  displayed  hesitation  in 
reciting,  the  Doctor  would  help  him  by  doling  out  ques- 
tions which  w^ere  intended  to  help  along,  and  which  often 
almost  contained  the  answer  sought  for.  Mistakes  or  er- 
roneous statements  he  would  most  frequently  correct  by 
going  back  to  the  particular  point,  after  the  student  had 
finished  his  part  of  the  recitation.  He  was  always  open 
to  questions  from  the  students,  and  seemed  delighted 
when  they  put  their  difificulties  forth  in  such  shape.  When 
a  student  came  poorly  prepared,  the  Doctor  seldom  gave 
any  evidence  of  disapprobation,  unless  it  was  an  entire 
failure  on  the  part  of  the  student ;  but  his  mark  invariably 
showed  a  just  estimate  of  the  fidelity  of  the  reciter.  His 
silence  was  a  sufficient  disapproval  of  such  cases.  .  .  .He 
displayed  an  almost  unlimited  patience  with  those  that 
were  slow  of  comprehension,  but  would  not  tolerate  any 
attempt  at  imposing  upon  him.  A  student  attempting 
this  would  find  himself  invited  to  take  his  seat  without 
further  ceremony. 

Whether  in  or  out  of  the  class  Dr.  Krauth  was  always 
the  finished  Christian  gentleman,  kind,  courteous  and 
dignified  to  the  students  as  to  all  others.  His  personality 
exercised  an  unmistakable  influence  upon  his  pupils.  His 
aim  seemed  to  be,  not  so  much  to  cover  the  entire  field 
of  philosophical  inquiry,  as  to  ground  his  pupils  thor- 
oughly in  a  sound  psychology,  and  to  instill  into  their 


270  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chat.  XVI. 

minds  the  fundamental  principles  of  a  true  philosophy, 
and  especially  to  fortify  them  against  the  false  and  speci- 
ous philosophy  of  the  day.  The  Doctor  never  gave  our 
class  a  system  of  his  own  in  philosophy.  His  criticisms 
indeed  proved  his  view  to  have  been  that  of  a  moderate 
idealism,  but  apart  from  pointing  out  the  fallacies  in 
the  realistic  and  also  the  ultra-idealistic  systems,  he  never 
directly  influenced  his  pupils  as  far  as  I  know,  towards 
any  system. 

At  this  point  we  may  properly  introduce  the  testimony 
of  his  colleague  and  friend  Dr.  Robert  Ellis  Thompson, 
as  one  best  fitted  to  appreciate  Dr.  Krauth's  "Contribu- 
tion to  Philosophy."  In  his  address  at  the  dedication  of 
the  Krauth  Memorial  Library  in  the  Theological  Semi- 
nary at  Mount  Airy,  (June  3,  1908),  Dr.  Thompson  said 
on  this  subject: 

His  general  attitude  was  sympathetic  to  the  Scotch 
Philosophy  and  the  natural  realism  of  Reid,  the  founder 
of  the  School  in  opposition  to  Idealism  no  less  than 
Materialism  and  philosophic  Skepticism.  But  every  man 
of  that  school  has  felt  that  Bishop  Berkeley,  the  great 
Irish  Idealist,  is  the  first  enemy  they  have  to  meet  and 
refute,  if  Hume,  the  Scottish  Skeptic,  is  the  second.  Dr. 
Krauth  approached  the  subject  from  the  historic  side,  and 
tmdertook  an  edition  of  Berkeley's  "Principles  of  Human 
Knowledge"*  which  exhibits  the  entire  discussion  of  the 

*Dr.  Krauth's  labors  in  the  preparation  of  this  edition  of  Berkeley 
extended  over  a  course  of  several  years.  He  meant  it  to  be  the 
standard  edition,  containing  the  text,  the  entire  annotations  of  Fraser, 
who  in  the  ablest  manner  vindicates  the  views  of  Berkeley,  the  entire 
notes  and  illustrations  of  Ueberweg  (Professor  in  Koenigsberg,  author 
of  "  Grundriss  der  Geschichte  der  Philosophie,"  died  1871)  who  with 
the  greatest  ability  and  moderation  qualifies  and  criticizes  them,  and 
has  surpassed  all  who  have  attempted  on  purely  scientific  grounds  to 
meet  Berkeley's  views.  He  had  read,  by  request,  before  the  Prince- 
ton Club,  consisting  of  the  professors  in  both  the  institutions  of  that 
place,  a  few  of  the  notes  from  Ueberweg,  and  Dr.  McCosh  and  the 
entire  body  of  the  professors  expressed  the  strongest  desire  that  the 
edition  should  be  published,  and  agreed  in  the  opinion  that  it  would 
meet  a  great  want  and  have  a  wide  circulation. 


1868-83.]  HIS  PHILOSOPHICAL   WORKS.  27 1 

problem  from  1710  to  1874  and  discusses  the  question  in 
the  Hght  of  all  the  arguments  on  both  sides.  It  is  a  mas- 
sive contribution  to  the  history  of  philosophy,  and  grati- 
fies the  admirers  of  Berkeley  by  showing  how  widely  the 
influence  of  his  book  had  been  felt,  and  how  it  contributed 
to  shaping  the  thought  of  Hume,  Kant,  Fichte  and  other 
great  metaphysicians.  It  is  the  most  candid  of  books, 
as  well  as  one  of  the  most  learned,  and  gives  its  author 
a  permanent  place  in  the  world's  philosophic  literature." 
Along  side  of  Dr.  Krauth's  Berkeley,  continues  Dr. 
Thompson,  may  be  placed  his  much  smaller  work,  which 
contains  a  translation  of  the  review  of  Strauss'  "The  Old 
Faith  and  the  New"  by  Dr.  Hermann  Ulrici,  along  with 
a  valuable  introduction  and  notes  by  Dr.  Krauth.  Here 
also  he  exhibited  his  patience  and  thoroughness  of 
method.  The  last  word  of  the  greatest  skeptic  of  the 
century,  in  which  he  comes  to  the  logical  outcome  of  his 
earlier  speculations  in  pure  atheism,  called  forth  a  whole 
literature  of  attack  and  defense.  Dr.  Krauth  collected  it 
all  and  studied  it  all  in  the  preparation  of  the  book.  Dr. 
Ulrici  felt  that  the  result  was  something  far  beyond  his 
review  in  scientific  value  and  practical  effect,  and  entered 
into  a  friendship  with  his  translator  which  lasted  as  long 
as  they  both  lived.  His  library  reflects  his  philosophical 
work  very  fully.  He  studied  the  great  masters  with  zest 
and  penetration,  giving  the  first  place  among  moderns  to 
Leibnitz,  but  appreciating  them  all  for  their  several  con- 
tributions to  the  thought  of  civilized  mankind.  He  was 
no  captious  critic  of  such  men,  and  never  thought  it  need- 
ful to  exalt  theolog}'  by  denying  the  worth  of  work  done 
in  other  fields.  He  even  had  a  value  for  such  a  pessimist 
•as  Schopenhauer,  as  furnishing  a  needed  corrective  to  the 
pantheistic  exaggerations  of  man's  natural  goodness,  and 
thus  confirming  the  teaching  of  Revelation  as  to  human 
depravity. 

DR.  krauth's  own  STANDPOINT  AS  A  PHILOSOPHER. 

The  best  presentation  of  Dr.  Krauth's  own  views  as 
.a  philosopher,  is  found  in  an  elaborate  paper  entitled  "The 


2/2  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XVL 

Strength  and  Weakness  of  Idealism,"  which  he  prepared 
for  the  Sixth  General  Conference  of  the  Evangelical  Al- 
liance, in  the  City  of  New  York,  where  it  was  read  on 
October  6,  1873.  (See  Evangelical  Alliance  Conference, 
New  York,  October  2-12,  1873,  edited  by  Rev.  Philip 
Schaff,  D.D.,  and  S.  Irenseus  Prime,  D.D.,  p.  293ff.) 
The  substance  of  this  paper  is  also  embodied  in  the  Pro- 
legomena of  his  edition  of  Berkeley,  pp.  122-142. 

Consciousness  is  defined  as  the  mind's  recognition  of 
its  own  conditions.  The  cognitions  of  consciousness  are 
admitted  as  absolute  and  infallible.  But  our  interpreta- 
tions of  consciousness  and  inferences  based  on  these  in- 
terpretations, may  be  incorrect.  Only  the  mind's  own 
states  are  positively  known,  nothing  else.  Based  on  this 
is  the  idealistic  postulate :  An  idea  can  be  like  nothing 
but  an  idea.  The  subjective  is  not  identical  with  the  ob- 
jective. The  idea  is  intellectual,  the  object  is  material. 
The  idea  is  in  my  mind,  the  object  is  external  to  my  mind. 
"The  beings  of  the  mind  are  not  of  clay."  This  repre- 
sents a  certain  speculative  strength  of  Idealism.  But  at 
the  same  time  it  implies  a  great  limitation.  The  con- 
sistent idealist  cannot  claim  to  know  anything  beyond 
this,  that  there  exist  ideas  in  his  consciousness.  He  can- 
not know  that  he  has  a  substantial  personal  existence,  or 
that  there  is  any  other  being,  finite  or  infinite,  beside  him- 
self. The  consistent  idealist  therefore  will  say  that  there 
is  nothing  he  knows,  thing  or  person,  beside  himself. 

The  idealistic  conception  of  man's  personality  forgets 
that  the  Ego  is  not  the  whole  man,  but  only  man's  mind. 
(Cogito,  ergo  sum).  Being  conscious  of  our  self,  we 
are  not  conscious  of  the  material  nature  associated  with 
ourself.  This  would  lead  consistently  to  the  absurdity 
that  we  have  not  substantial  bodies,  or  do  not  directly 
know  we  have  them.  This,  then,  involves  a  false  con- 
struction of  the  personality  of  man.     There  is  no  sort  of 


18-3]  MATTER   AXD  MIND.  273 

proof  proper  that  man  is  spirit,  apart  from  proof  that  he 
is  also  body. 

On  the  relation  of  matter  to  mind  the  ignorant  physi- 
cist says:  We  know  that  there  is  matter,  why  go  to  an 
unknown  something  called  mind?  But  this  very  asser- 
tion implies  the  priority  of  something  kuozcing  to  the 
something  knoivn.  In  asserting  matter,  the  physicist  had 
to  postulate  mind.  On  the  other  hand,  Idealism  dare  not 
set  aside  the  fact  that  the  Non-Ego  does  operate  on  the 
Ego.  Here  is  its  danger  of  running  into  Skepticism  and 
even  Nihilism.  In  matter  are  hidden  divine  forces.  It 
too  is  worthy  of  God.  We  cannot  measure  it,  because  we 
cannot  measure  Him.  We  cannot  think  too  highly  of 
spirit,  but  we  can  think  too  little  of  matter.  Matter  and 
Mind  conjoined  do  not  merely  add  their  powers  each  to 
each,  but  evolve  new  powers,  incapable  of  existence  out- 
side of  their  union. 

Idealism  makes  much  of  the  Universe  as  a  thing  of 
Thought,  over  against  blind  fate,  aimless  chance,  evolu- 
tion without  mind  to  guide  it.  It  asserts  plan,  as  before 
all  evolution ;  asserts  that  the  entire  phenomenal,  physical 
and  spiritual,  finds  its  last  root  and  cause  in  personal 
reason.  But  the  failure  or  weakness  of  Idealism  on  this 
point  is,  that  it  denies  the  word,  as  the  body  of  the 
thought,  the  medium  through  which  it  awakens  thought, 
and  by  which  mind  is  operative  on  mind.  Berkeley  is 
unsatisfactory  in  the  explanation  of  the  impartition  of 
the  divine  ideas  to  us.  He  appeals  to  the  omnipotence 
of  God  as  capable  of  making  direct  impressions  on  the 
mind.  There  is  a  certain  "Gnostic  undervaluation  of 
matter,"  in  spite  of  the  conception  of  the  Phenomena  of 
the  Universe  as  language  in  which  mind  speaks  to  mind. 
But  this  is,  after  all,  a  language  without  words.  (It 
reminds  us  of  that  striking  saying  of  Haman, — "der 
Magus  des  Nordens," — that  the  language  of  nature  con- 


274  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chaf.XVI. 

sists  of  Consonants,  to  which  the  human  mind  must 
bring  the  vowels,  as  in  the  Hebrew  language.) 

The  confusion,  obscurity  and  vacillation  of  other 
philosophical  systems  in  their  definition  of  substance, — 
^'Das  Ding  an  sich" — has  been  a  feature  of  strength  for 
Idealism.  But  the  difficulties  in  handling  this  subject  are 
even  greater  in  Idealism.  It  is  encumbered  with  the  per- 
plexity of  treating  physical  substance  as  if  it  were  a  fact, 
while  it  yet  conceives  of  it  as  a  fiction. 

In  its  interpretation  of  causality  Idealism  is  not 
stronger  than  other  philosophical  systems.  It  is  com- 
pelled to  accept  experience  as  a  source  of  difficulties, 
while  it  dare  not  use  it  as  a  means  of  relief  from  them. 

An  element  of  strength  in  Idealism  is  in  its  tendency 
to  unity,  a  monistic  conception  and  construction  of  facts, 
as  in  Pantheism,  Materialism  and  the  so-called  "Identi- 
taets-Philosophie"  (doctrine  of  identity).  But  Idealism 
shares  in  the  weakness  of  Pantheism  and  Materialism,  in 
that  it  finds  unity  not  in  the  harmony  of  the  things  that 
differ,  but  in  the  absorption  of  the  one  into  the  other. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  of  experience,  the  dualism  of  things 
spiritual  and  things  material  is  admitted  by  all  schools. 
Before  they  begin  to  philosophize,  the  materialist  and  the 
idealist  agree  on  the  phenomenal  facts.  But  when  they 
begin  to  philosophize,  the  materialist  denies  mind,  the 
idealist  denies  matter,  each  being  a  dogmatist.  There  is 
no  genuine  proof  that  there  is  matter,  which  is  not  a 
proof  that  there  is  mind;  no  genuine  proof  that  there  is 
mind,  which  is  not  a  proof  that  there  is  matter.  Matter, 
isolated  from  mind  is  unknown;  mind  isolated  from  mat- 
ter is  unknozving.  They  are  not  opposites  but  correlates, 
as  subject  and  object.  As  Philosophy  alone  knows  them, 
there  can  be  no  mind  conceived  without  matter,  no  mat- 
ter conceived  without  mind.  Materialism  and  Idealism 
are  alike  forms  of  direct  self-contradiction. 

The  principles  of  Idealism  seem  to  be  the  most  ef- 


i873.]  IDEALISM  AND  REALISM. 

2/5 

factual  forces  to  overthrow  Materialism.     One  of  Ber 

keley  s  practical  incentives  was  the  hope  of  acconinhsh 

.ng  .h.s  defeat  of  Materialism.    His  greatness  is  the    rue 

estimate  of  the  value  of  the  soul,  and  of  the  majesty  o 

the  mmd.  the  evulence  of  the  persomlity,  the  independent 

existence,  the  amazing  faculties  of  the  spirit  of  man 

Matter  ,s  for  mind;  the  psychical  rules  the  physical    the 

sp.r,t  ,s  the  educator  of  the  organs;  the  Universe  is  ex! 

pressed  thought  and  plan,  conceived  by  mind  for  mind- 

the    anguage  m  which  the  Infinite  Spirit  speaks  to  the 

created  sp.nts;  law   the  revelation   of  will;  nature  an 

eternal  logic  and  aesthetic ;  man  an  indivisible  perso"    h" 

essent.al  personality  inherent  in  the  soul;  the  soul  not 

the  result  of  organism,  but  organism  the  result  of  soul 

1  he  Universe  we  knoiv  cannot  exist  without  mind    There 

is  no  man  s  Universe  outside  of  man 

is  ?he  relf'"^K  °f  ^'h°.™"&h-going  extreme  Idealism 
IS  he  reaction  by  which  ,t  promotes  Materialism  To 
make  a  real  thing  nothing  is  the  best  preparation  for  mak- 
mg  I  everythmg.  Fichte,  Schelling,  Hegel  lead  to 
Feuerbacl,  Vogt,  Moleschott;  Bacon,  Hobbes^rnd  Locke 

wh^t'tr"'  .  '^  '"'^  ^P'""^-  "  y™  "''ke  men  doubi 
what  hey  have  seen,  how  can  they  continue  to  believe 
in  that  which  they  have  not  seen  ? 

While  the  extravagances  and  mistakes  of  Realism  are 
favorable  to  Idealism,  a  sober  Realism  becomes  a  most 
formidable  antagonist  of  Idealism,  and  is  admitted  as 

moods  Tr^p-'^;  *'  '''"'"'"  ""■""'  '"  ''^  P^-'i-l 
rr  %,,?"'■  "'*'  ^^^des;  "Idealism  is  speculative 
only.  When  ,t  comes  to  action.  Realism  presses  upon 
every  man,  even  upon  the  most  decided  idealist.  Idealism 
.s  the  true  reverse  of  life."  With  this  statement  he  passes 
judgment  on  his  own  system. 

Even  Kant  never  reached  the  point  at  which  he  could 
pretend  to  say.  on  speculative  grounds:  Intelligo  ~^s 
over  agamst :  Credo  ut~.  ^ 


2/6  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chat.  XYl. 

His  heart  went  over  from  the  philosopher's  to  the 
vulgar,  and  tried  to  stanch  the  wounds  of  the  "Pure" 
with  the  bandages  of  the  "Practical  Reason."  (Reine 
Vernunft — Praktische  Vernunft).  But  the  bandages  of 
the  "practical"  could  only  be  found  in  the  repository  of 
the  "pure,"  and  from  thence  Kant  had  removed  them. 
His  "reason"  affirmed  Idealism.  His  instinct  clung  to 
Realism.  Kant  perpetually  unravelled  in  one  what  he 
wove  in  the  other.  The  shroud  of  Penelope  was  never 
completed.  All  recent  Idealism  is  the  exaggeration  or 
isolation  of  Kantian  principles,  but,  if  Idealism  is  Kant- 
ianism, Kant  did  not  understand  his  own  system.  If  his 
creed  was  idealistic,  his  faith  was  realistic.  Recent 
Idealism  is  the  disavowed,  if  not  the  illegitimate,  child 
of  the  great  thinker  it  claims  as  its  father. 

In  striking  contrast  Berkeley  and  Fichte  are  quoted  as 
representing  the  truly  noble  and  elevating  features  of 
Idealism  over  against  its  dangerous  tendencies.  In  Ber- 
keley he  praises  the  "sublime  embodiment  of  the  true 
philosophical  spirit,  the  loftiness  of  its  aims,  the  single- 
ness of  its  purpose,  the  invincible  persistence  of  its  fidelity 
to  conviction.  Without  disloyalty  to  the  practical  turn  of 
the  English  mind,  he  has  been  true  to  purely  intellectual 
interests.  He  at  least  has  not  degraded  philosophy  to 
the  kitchen.  His  works  are  a  bulwark  of  the  highest 
faiths,  hopes  and  aspirations  of  the  heart  of  man,  and 
they  are  such,  in  part,  because  of  their  distinct  assertion 
of  the  personality  and  freedom  of  God,  the  personality, 
freedom  and  accountability  of  man."  Over  against  this 
he  points  to  the  "  overweening  Titanic  arrogance  "  of 
some  of  the  German  idealistic  philosophers,  which  even 
the  noble  nature  of  Fichte  could  not  hide. 

The  philosophy  of  the  future,  he  concludes,  is  one 
which  will  be  neither  absolute  Idealism,  nor  absolute 
Realism,  but  will  accept  the  facts  of  both,  and  fuse  them 
in  a  system  which,  like  man  himself,  shall  blend  the  two 


iB73]  HEALTHY   BIBLICAL    REALISM.  277 

realities  as  distinct  yet  inseparable,  the  duality  of  natures 
harmonized,  yet  not  vanishing  in  the  Monism  of  person. 
Its  Universe  shall  be  one  of  accordant,  not  of  discordant 
matter  and  mind, — a  Universe  held  together  and  ever 
developing  under  the  plan  and  control  of  the  one  Su- 
preme, who  is  neither  absolutely  immanent,  nor  abso- 
lutely supramundane,  but  relatively  both, — immanent  in 
the  sense  in  which  Deism  denies  its  presence,  supramund- 
ane in  the  sense  in  which  Pantheism  ignores  this  relation. 
Its  God  shall  be  not  the  mere  maker  of  the  Universe,  as 
Deism  asserts,  nor  its  matter,  as  Pantheism  presents  Him, 
but  its  Preserver,  Benefactor,  Ruler  and  Father,  who, 
whether  in  matter  or  mind,  reveals  the  perfect  reason,  the 
perfect  love,  the  perfect  will,  the  consummate  power,  in 
absolute  and  eternal  personality.* 

It  seems  to  us  that,  back  of  this  outline  of  philosophical 
theory  we  can  readily  discern  the  healthy  biblical  Re- 
alism of  the  mature  Lutheran  Theologian  to  whom — 
over  against  the  Zwinglian  abstraction :  Finitum,  non 
capax  Infiniti, — the  great  central  and  fundamental  truth 
is  the  real  union  of  the  Visible  and  Invisible,  the  Heavenly 
and  the  Earthly,  the  Divine  and  the  Human  in  the  great 
fact  of  Incarnation,  in  the  person  of  the  Godman  and 
in  the  objective  reality  of  the  divinely  appointed  means 
of  grace,  particularly  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar. 

This  brief  sketch  of  Dr.  Krauth's  philosophical  stand- 
point would  not  be  complete  without  adding  some  of  the 
most  characteristic  and  pointed  statements  from  his  in- 
troduction to  Hermann  Ulrici's  Review  of  David 
Friedrich  Strauss.  Here  he  deals  with  the  Materialism 
of  the  day.  He  fully  recognizes  its  great  power  and  the 
necessity  of  meeting  it,  not  with  dogmatic  anathemas  but 

*Dr.  Krauth  was  an  "  Idealistic  Realist,"  as  Theo.  E.  Schmauk, 
then  a  student  in  our  theological  Seminary  and  Editor  of  the 
"  Indicator"  said  in  an  appreciative  tribute,  at  the  time  of  his  death. 
{Indicator,  February  1883.) 


278  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XYI. 

with  a  truly  scientific  and  scholarly  method  of  patient  in- 
vestigation and  close  argumentation.  His  fearless  love 
of  truth,  and  his  optimistic  hope  in  its  ultimate  triumph 
over  all  error,  are  strikingly  exhibited  in  this  valuable 
"Introduction"  which,  with  its  72  pages,  constitutes  more 
than  one-half  of  the  volume :  Strauss  as  a  Philosophical 
Thinker.  Philadelphia,  Smith,  English  &  Co.,  Edinburgh, 
T.  &  T.  Clark,  1874. 

Materialism,  he  says,  calls  for  an  obliteration  of  what 
is  noblest  in  the  past,  the  abandonment  of  our  richest 
heritages,  and  a  total  reconstruction  of  all  the  present, 
an  abrupt  change  in  all  that  tended  to  a  future  with  roots 
deepest  in  the  past.  .  .  .  All  sciences  have  been  made 
tributary  to  the  false  assumptions  of  the  Materialism  of 
our  day.  .  .  .  The  right  use  of  science  will  most  com- 
pletely overthrow  Materialism.  If  so  much  science  pro- 
motes Materialism,  it  is  proof  not  that  we  need  less 
science,  but  that  we  need  more.  .  .  .  Only  let  the  science 
be  real  science,  and  there  cannot  be  too  much  of  it.  To 
appeal  from  science  in  its  legitimate  sphere,  to  authority, 
in  behalf  of  religion,  is  not  to  secure  religion  but  to  be- 
tray it.  Science  and  religion  are  occupied  with  two 
books,  but  both  books  are  from  one  hand;  in  their  true 
workings  they  are  engaged  in  two  parts  of  one  great  aim. 
Science  moves  ever  toward  the  proof  how  supernatural 
is  the  natural ;  Religion  moves  toward  the  proof  how 
natural  is  the  supernatural.  For  nature  in  the  narrower 
sense,  is,  in  her  spring.  Supernatural.  .  .  .  The  more  we 
know  of  nature,  the  more  cogent  becomes  the  necessity 
of  the  Supernatural.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Super- 
natural is  within  Nature,  in  Nature's  broader  sense.  In 
this  sense  Nature  is  identical  with  the  real.  Everything 
is  Nature  that  is  not  non-nature ;  everything  is  natural 
that  is  not  unnatural.  The  Supernatural  is  not  to  be 
construed  as  the  contranatural,  but  as  the  natural  itself 
in  its  supremest  sphere,  and  God  and  His  directest  works 
are    supernatural,    because    they    are    by    pre-eminence 


i874]  THE  MATERIALISM  OF  THE  PERIOD.  279 

natural.  .  .  .  The  sciences  which  represent  nature,  and 
the  faith  to  which  are  committed  the  oracles  of  the  Super- 
natural, must  in  proportion  as  they  prove  true  to  them- 
selves, prove  true  to  each  other.  .  .  . 

All  the  intensest  passions  of  our  human  life  gather 
about  some  sort  of  battle.  The  unf ought  is  unfelt.  The 
materialistic  struggle  more  than  anything  else  vitalizes 
the  natural  sciences — for  thinking  is,  after  all,  the  su- 
premest  pleasure  of  thinking  man.  The  intellect  beats  the 
material  in  all  long  races.  .  .  .  Those  who  know  the 
facts,  know  that  the  philosophical  spirit  is  the  spirit  which 
vitalizes  all  the  material  with  the  mental,  and  connects  all 
phenomena  with  conceptions  of  the  essence  they  repre- 
sent, all  facts  with  truth,  all  effects  with  causes,  all  that 
is  individual  with  the  coherence  of  relations,  all  premises 
with  inferences,  all  the  transient  with  the  ultimate.  .  .  . 
All  the  physical  sciences,  as  sciences,  rest  upon  meta- 
physical data,  and  develop  themselves  toward  meta- 
physical sequences. 

Materialism  is  popularized  in  our  day.  The  magazines 
and  papers  are  full  of  it.  It  creeps  in  everywhere,  in 
the  text-books,  in  schoolbooks.  in  books  for  children,  and 
in  popular  lectures.  Materialism  has  entered  into  the 
great  institutions  of  Germany,  England  and  America. 
Our  old  seats  of  orthodoxy  have  been  invaded  by  it.  .  .  . 
The  }ilaterialism  of  our  day  is  very  versatile.  It  takes 
many  shapes,  often  avoids  a  sharp  conflict,  assumes  the 
raiment  of  light,  knows  how  to  play  well  the  parts  of 
free  thought,  truth  and  beneficence.  .  .  .  All  the  more 
securely  does  it  pass  in  everywhere,  so  that  we  have 
Materialism  intellectual,  domestic,  civil,  philanthropic, 
and  religious.  .  .  .  Much  of  the  Materialism  of  our  day 
is  servile  and  dogmatic,  implicit  in  credulity,  and  insolent 
in  assertion.  Professing  to  be  independent  of  names, 
and  calling  men  to  rally  about  the  standard  of  absolute 
freedom  from  all  authority,  it  parades  names  where  it 
has  names  to  parade,  and  vilifies  the  fair  fame  of  those 
whom  it  cannot  force  into  acquiescence  or  silence.  Claim- 
ing to  be  free  from  partisanship,  it  is  full  of  coarse  in- 


28o  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

tolerance.  It  is  an  inquisition,  with  such  tortures  as  the 
spirit  of  our  age  still  leaves  possible.  The  rabies  theo- 
logorum  of  which  it  loves  to  talk,  pales  before  the  rabies 
physicorum  of  this  class,  sometimes  as  directed  against 
each  other,  yet  more  as  directed  against  the  men  of 
science  or  of  the  church,  who  resist  their  theories.  .   .  . 

There  are  good  and  intelligent  people  who  object 
even  to  an  exposure  of  Materialism  which  may  inci- 
dentally bring  it  to  the  notice  of  some,  who,  they  imagine, 
would  apart  from  such  an  exposure,  have  remained  in 
ignorance  or  indifference  as  to  the  whole  subject.  .  .  . 
We  answer :  Ignorance  is  neither  innocence  nor  safety. 
Knowledge,  indeed,  like  all  possessions,  is  capable  of 
abuse.  There  is  danger  in  whatever  we  do,  and  wher- 
ever there  is  danger  in  doing,  there  may  be  danger  in 
leaving  undone.  There  is  danger  of  accident  in  exercise, 
there  is  the  greater  danger  of  loss  of  health  in  not  exer- 
cising; there  is  the  danger  of  choking  or  of  surfeiting  in 
eating,  the  greater  danger  of  starvation  in  not  eating. 
.  .  .  Many  men  are  drowned  in  swimming,  many  more 
men  are  drowned  because  they  do  not  know  how  to  swim. 
Hazard  is  the  law  of  life,  a  law  which  becomes  more 
exacting  as  life  rises  into  its  higher  forms.  Life  itself 
binds  up  all  hazards,  and  is  itself  the  supreme  hazard. 
He  only  never  risks  who  never  lives,  and  he  who  incurs 
none  of  the  hazards  of  life,  performs  none  of  its  du- 
ties. .  .  . 

But  if  ignorance  were  innocence  and  safety,  the  fea- 
tures of  our  time  on  which  we  have  dwelt,  show  that 
ignorance  here  is  impossible.  The  choice  is  not  be- 
tween ignorance  and  some  sort  of  knowledge  of  Ma- 
terialism, but  between  intelligent  and  correct  impressions, 
and  false  ones.  .  .  .  Which  shall  the  minds  that  are 
forming  have :  a  knowledge  of  Materialism  in  all  its 
strength  without  the  antidote,  or  of  Materialism  falsely 
understated,  with  the  possibility,  almost  certainty,  that 
they  will  one  day  see  that  it  has  been  understated,  and 
rush  to  the  conclusion  that  its  opponents  did  not  dare  to 
let  the  truth  about  it  be  known;  or  shall  we  have  Mater- 


1873-4]  LETTER  FROM   ULRICI.  281 

ialisni  fairly  presented  and  fairly  met?  .  .  .  The  mere 
seeming  to  avoid  fair  discussion  does  more  mischief  than 
a  real  acquaintance  with  Materialism  possibly  can.  To 
be  cowardly  is  to  be  beaten  without  a  battle.  Materialism, 
with  the  arrogance  common  to  all  error,  claims  to  be  in- 
vincible. If  it  be  not  attacked,  or  its  attack  be  declined, 
its  explanation  is  invariably  found  in  the  fears  of  its 
antagonists. 

In  a  letter  dated  Halle,  October,  1873,  Ulrici  thanks 
Dr.  Krauth  most  heartily  for  his  co-opefation  and  says : 
"While  I  am  making  only  slow  progress  in  my  fight 
against  prevailing  Naturalism.  Sensualism  and  Material- 
ism in  Germany,  as  well  as  in  England  and  France,  it 
gives  me  all  the  greater  joy  to  find  some  recognition  and 
appreciation  of  my  philosophical  labors  and  aims  in 
America.  .  .  .  Let  us  continue  to  work  together  for  the 
preservation  of  the  highest  ideals  of  our  human  race, 
which  unfortunately  in  our  day  are  being  attacked  on 
all  sides  and  threatened  with  complete  overthrow." 

Dr.  Phil.  Scliaff  writes  (June  i,  1874)  :  I  thank  you 
heartily  for  a  copy  of  your  Anti-Strauss.  You  have  done 
excellent  service  to  truth.  Strauss'  last  book  is  his 
funeral  dirge.  He  has  completely  refuted  himself.  As 
an  idealist  and  pantheist  he  was  respectable,  as  a  mater- 
ialist and  atheist  he  is  contemptible.  I  always  feared  he 
w^ould  end  in  materialism,  or  rather  the  nihilism  of  de- 
spair. For  he  was  not  a  noble  nature,  but  intensely  selfish 
and  close-fisted. 

THE   LIBRARY. 

The  building  up  of  his  private  library  was  closely  con- 
nected with  Dr.  Krauth's  w'ork  as  a  teacher  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Pennsylvania  and  the  theological  Seminary. 
His  interest  in  general  literature,  as  well  as  in  philosophy 
and  theolog}',  is  reflected  in  his  choice  of  the  books  that 
formed  the  chief  treasures  of  his  librarv.     His  ideas  of 


282  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVL 

what  a  library  ought  to  be,  are  briefly  stated  in  the  "Re- 
ports on  the  Bucknell  Library,  Crozer  Theological  Sem- 
inary," by  Drs.  C.  P.  Krauth  and  Ezra  Abbott  in  1873, 
(published  in  pamphlet  form,  Philadelphia,  1874).  It 
is  not  a  mere  accidental  or  aimless  aggregation  of  books. 
It  is  an  organism  growing  around  a  great  central  idea, 
conditioned  by  a  well  defined  object,  which  is  never  lost 
sight  of,  but  is  carried  steadily  through  on  a  well  defined 
plan.  The  editions  of  books  ought  to  be  the  very  best, 
not  the  rubbish  of  the  libraries  of  continental  scholars,  a 
rubbish  of  superseded  editions,  presentation  copies  of 
still-born  books,  defaced,  ill  bound  and  unbound  works, 
the  preservation  of  many  of  which  is  pure  injustice  to 
the  paper-maker. 

The  books  ought  to  be  not  merely  good  books  but  the 
best;  and  not  simply  best,  but  the  best  of  the  best.  .  .  . 
He  praises  the  scholarly  impartiality  in  the  selection  of 
books  found  in  the  Bucknell  Library. 

The  books  have  gone  in  purely  on  their  merits.  They 
form  a  Library,  not  a  one-sided  argument  built  up  in  one- 
sided books.  You  are  not  forced  to  learn  systems  from 
their  opponents,  or  to  make  up  your  opinion  by  diligently 
reading  everything  that  can  be  said  on  only  one  side  of  a 
subject ....  Next  to  what  it  has,  a  library  is  rich  in  what 
it  omits.  Useless  books  are  worse  than  useless  in  a 
library;  they  are  pernicious.  They  hide  and  supplant  the 
good  books.  They  make  hay-stacks  to  hide  needles.  A 
library  should  separate  the  sheep  from  the  goats.  ...  In 
a  general  way  books  are  of  two  classes:  i. — The  books 
out  of  which  other  books  are  made;  2. — the  books  which 
are  made  out  of  other  books.  No  library  is  entitled  to  the 
name,  which  does  not  lay  its  foundation  in  books  of  the 
first  class.  The  first  class  will  make  by  themselves  a 
library;  the  second  will  not.  To  the  first  class  belong 
books  which  the  teacher,  the  scholar,  the  investigator 
need,  books  which  are  so  rare  and  hard  of  access  in  our 


i88o.]  HIS  VIEWS  ON  THE  LIBRARY.  283 

country.  The  student  needs  to  know  of  this  class  of 
books  long-  before  he  can  directly  use  them.  He  should 
look  to  them  as  something  into  which  he  is  to  grow.  The 
mere  knowledge  that  these  books  are.  helps  to  make  him 
a  thinker,  to  give  him  broader  views,  and  urges  him  to 
become  a  man  of  real  learning  and  independence. 

The  Bureau  of  Education  in  Washington  invited  Dr. 
Krauth  (August  5,  1875,)  to  furnish  "the  introductory 
paper  for  a  work  on  American  Libraries  in  preparation 
by  this  Bureau,  covering  the  section  on  Theological  Li- 
braries." His  name  had  been  recommended  by  Dr.  Ezra 
Abbott  as  "eminently  qualified  to  perform  the  work."  It 
was  suggested  that  he  should  describe  "the  historical 
development  of  this  class  of  libraries,  progressive  changes 
in  their  character,  present  condition  as  to  size,  means  of 
support,  denominational  divisions,  adaptation  to  the  re- 
quirements of  the  theological  Schools;  and  the  principles 
which  should  govern  the  selection  of  books  for  a  theo- 
logical library."  This  volume  was  intended  for  the  ap- 
proaching centennial  of  1876.  Dr.  Krauth's  paper  was 
to  cover  from  eight  to  ten  printed  octavo  pages,  and  was 
to  be  delivered  by  the  first  of  September.  Considering 
the  extensive  correspondence,  especially  the  collection  of 
necessary  statistics,  etc.,  which  such  a  work  required,  the 
time  set  for  its  completion  was  manifestly  too  short,  and 
we  do  not  wonder  that  Dr.  Krauth  did  not  feel  inclined 
to  undertake  it. 

In  an  elaborate  article  prepared  for  Stoddart's  Re- 
view, we  find  the  fullest  statement  of  his  views  on 

THE  library;  what  it  is,  and  what  it  ought  to  be. 

A  library  is  an  organism.  It  is  not  a  mere  accidental 
or  aimless  aggregation  of  books.  It  must  not  only  have 
the  proper  parts  somewhere,  but  should  have  them  in 
their  right  places  and  in  their  right  relations.     It  cannot 


284  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

be  ordered  from  the  bookseller  by  the  three  dimensions 
and  the  color  of  the  covers, — three  yards  of  novels  and 
three  inches  of  solid  reading;  the  novels  full  calf,  in 
crimson  and  gold,  the  solid  reading  in  black  half-split- 
sheep.  As  no  mere  aggregation  of  limbs,  muscles,  and 
bones  makes  a  human  body,  as  no  jumbling  together  of 
beautiful  features  would  constitute  beauty,  so  no  amount 
of  books  makes,  as  such,  a  library.  There  are  ambitious 
cartloads  of  print,  shot  into  shelves,  which  just  as  much 
make  a  library,  as  the  heterogeneous  masses  of  tables, 
chairs,  crockery,  looking-glasses,  and  tin  pans  which  form 
the  rubbish  at  an  auctioneer's  rooms,  convert  them  into 
a  well-furnished  house.  A  true  library  must  grow  around 
a  great  central  idea;  it  must  be  conditioned  by  well-de-- 
fined  objects,  which  are  never  to  be  lost  sight  of,  but  are 
to  be  steadily  carried  through  on  an  intelligent  plan.  It 
must  have  unity  even  in  seemingly  boundless  variety. 
Could  it  embrace  all  books,  it  would  unify  them  as  a  uni- 
versal one,  and  by  its  arrangement,  convert  the  matter  of 
a  chaos  into  a  world  of  beauty  and  order.  As  the  blade 
of  grass  is  a  unit  of  harmonies  in  an  idea,  so  no  less  is 
the  universe  the  unit  of  total  harmonies  in  one  total  idea, 
all  relative  ones  within  the  absolute  one.  A  true  library, 
little  or  great  in  bulk,  involves  unity,  not  mechanical  but 
organizing.  We  may  call  a  dead,  confused  collection  of 
books  a  library,  as  we  call  the  jumbled  fossil  fragments 
of  a  fish,  a  fish,  or  as  we  call  the  remains  of  a  man,  a 
man.  But  as  the  real  animal  or  man  must  have  life,  so 
must  a  library  be  a  living  thing,  with  a  heart  and  brain ; 
it  must  be  vital  in  its  conception  and  in  its  growth ;  the 
organ  of  intellect,  the  embodiment  of  moral  intent. 

The  plan  of  a  library  may  be  general  or  special,  or 
partly  general  and  partly  special ;  the  method  of  each  of 
these  again  may  be  aggregative  or  selective,  or  in  part 
both. 

A  library  may  be  general.  It  may  aim  at  covering  the 
whole  ground  of  literature  in  the  widest  sense  of  that 
word,  which  embraces  all  classes  of  books;  the  works 


i88o.]  A  LIBRARY  MUST  HAVE  A  PLAN.  285 

which  contribute  to  knowledge  as  well  as  those  which 
minister  to  taste. 

Or  a  library  may  be  special,  designed  for  particular 
wants.  It  may  cluster  around  the  wants  of  an  institu- 
tion ;  it  may  be  the  library  of  a  school,  of  a  literary  so- 
ciety, or  of  a  college.  It  may  narrow  its  sphere  to  the 
wants  of  a  profession, — there  are  engineering,  military, 
medical,  legal,  and  theological  libraries;  it  may  devote 
itself  to  the  rarities  of  bibliography,  the  incunabula,  the 
products  of  world-renowned  presses,  such  as  those  of 
Faust,  Caxton,  Aldus,  the  Stephens,  the  Elzevirs,  the 
Diots,  Pickering ;  the  copies  whose  glory  is  their  margins, 
and  tops,  and  material ;  tall  copies,  large  paper  copies, 
uncut  copies ;  copies  on  vellum,  tinted  paper,  asbestos,  and 
other  unusual  material;  copies  with  miniature  paintings 
and  illuminated  initials;  copies  printed  in  silver,  in  gold, 
in  colors ;  books  consisting  entirely  of  engraved  plates ; 
books  that  have  belonged  to  illustrious  men ;  in  a  word,  to 
all  the  qualities  of  books  except  their  matter.  The  motto 
of  the  bibliomaniac  is,  *'The  raiment  is  more  than  the 
body." 

To  the  bibliomaniac  as  such,  the  Bible  as  a  divine  book 
has  no  value.  What  he  values  is  a  copy  which  omits  a  not 
in  the  Commandments,  the  wicked  Bible,  as  it  has  been 
called ;  a  Bible  which  has  the  parable  of  the  vinegar  in- 
stead of  the  vineyard;  a  Bible  which  represents  St.  Paul 
as  solemnly  assuring  the  Corinthians  that  he  would  not 
have  them  to  be  "burned"  instead  of  "burdened."  He 
knows  the  Geneva  Bible  by  the  one  word  "brteches," 
and  the  Parker  (Bishops')  Bible  by  one  abominable 
pictured  initial.  The  features  of  an  edition  of  a  Bible 
which  recommend  it  to  him,  are  those  which  unfit  it  for 
others.  The  book  is  tJie  book  to  him  because  it  inserts 
what  does  not  belong  to  it,  or  omits  what  does.  His 
travesty,  on  each  new  accession  of  a  book  of  Heaven 
demonized  by  the  printer,  is, 

"  Precious  Bible,  glad  it's  mine, 
Every  part  that's  not  divine." 


286  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

Some  libraries,  as  for  example  the  Vatican,  put  their 
strength  into  manuscripts.  Among  the  vandal  glories  of 
some  is  a  collection  of  titlepages  detached  from  the  books 
to  which  they  belong — the  barbarous  and  senseless  epicur- 
ism of  a  dish  of  nightingales'  tongues.  There  is  hardly 
a  conceivable  specialty  which  has  not  been  made  the  basis 
of  selection.  Some  libraries  are  made  up  of  the  com- 
monplace books  about  which  everybody  knows,  and 
others  rigidly  exclude  the  class  "which  no  gentleman's 
library  is  complete  without," — the  class  of  books  which 
was  Charles  Lamb's  special  aversion.  No  one  who  has 
not  examined  the  special  collections  or  their  catalogues, 
can  imagine  what  a  world  of  books  there  is,  on  topics  on 
which  the  uninitiated  would  think  there  is  nothing,  and 
how  unwisely  men  sometimes  assume  that  the  book  they 
write,  is  first  and  alone  in  its  class.  Nothing  is  more 
delicious  than  the  dreams  of  ignorance,  and  nothing  so 
unpleasant  as  being  roused  from  them. 

A  library  may  be  partly  general  and  partly  special.  It 
may  cover  to  some  extent  the  ground  of  common  wants, 
and  yet  have  departments  which  are  developed  in  larger 
proportions.  Often  a  library  whose  main  design  is  spec- 
ial, has  a  fair  proportion  of  books  of  a  wider  scope.  These 
do  not  of  necessity  break  in  upon  its  special  character,  for 
nothing  can  be  so  special  as  to  have  no  links  with  the 
general.  If  the  theologian,  or  lawyer,  or  physician  is 
to  be  confined  to  one  library,  meant  specially  for  his  pro- 
fession, that  library  should  embrace  in  some  proportion 
good  books  out  of  many  departments.  The  ocean  needs 
constant  additions  of  fresh  water;  without  them  it  would 
become  a  vast  pond  of  brine;  the  living  things  would 
perish,  and  at  last  instead  of  being  the  ever-moving  and 
free,  it  would  become  a  desert  of  salt.  So  in  the  pro- 
fessional library,  kept  too  absolutely  to  its  own  technical 
stores,  the  salt  itself  ceases  to  be  an  element  of  health 
and  preservation.  In  place  of  the  glorious  growth,  like 
that  of  vegetation  and  animal  forms,  which  it  should  pro- 
mote, it  comes  at  last  to  be  no  more  at  best  than  a  Salt 
Lake  of  Utah — dead  waters  bounded  by  dead  shores. 


i88o.]  THE  LIBRARY  LIKE  UNTO  A  NET.  287 

The  catacombs  of  the  intellectual  world  are  stacked  with 
munimitied  minds,  trophies  of  that  spurious  conservatism 
which  embalms  the  dead,  and  tries  in  vain  to  keep  them 
everlastingly  unchanged,  instead  of  aiming  at  conserva- 
tion from  decay  by  the  power  of  an  ever-fresh  and  self- 
renewing  motion.  A  library  may  break  into  pimples  with 
pastry  and  comfit  literature,  or  be  starved  by  withholding 
all  nutriment,  or  be  driven  into  scurvy  by  being  kept  on 
barrelled  meats.  Its  rooms  should  be  a  banqueting  palace 
in  a  great  park ;  not  a  gloomy  vault,  where  neglected 
worthies,  surrounded  by  bats  and  crocodiles,  and  all  the 
other  sacred  beasts  of  learned  superstition,  immortal  in 
traditional  balsam  and  aromatics,  wait  for  a  resurrection 
which  never  comes. 

The  general  library  may  be  aggregative.  It  may  aim 
at  collecting  everything  with  the  most  absolute  possible 
fulness,  selecting  nothing,  making  no  discrimination,  put- 
ting out  a  great  net,  the  bottom  of  which  drags  the  bot- 
tom, and  the  top  of  which  floats  on  the  waves,  bringing 
to  land  books  of  all  classes  to  be  put  alike  into  vessels  for 
keeping,  treating  the  many  sorts  as  all  of  one  kind,  the 
good  and  bad  being  alike  good  for  it.  Such  approxi- 
mately general  libraries  are  of  immense  importance.  F'or 
what  after  all  is  absolute  worthlessness  in  a  book,  such 
worthlessness  as  precludes  any  possible  use  of  it  for  any 
person  or  for  any  purpose  whatsoever?  The  historian 
•of  morals  may  find  his  saddest,  his  richest,  and  most  im- 
pressive lessons  in  books  which  but  for  the  purpose  of 
illustration,  testimony,  and  warning,  no  decent  man 
should  touch.  To  verify  the  awful  picture  of  heathen 
degradation  drawn  in  the  first  chapter  of  Romans,  Tho- 
luck  is  obliged  to  use  the  writings  of  some  who  were 
steeped  in  the  foulness  of  which  they  bear  witness.  Who 
tell  the  secret  of  their  era  like  Martial  and  the  erotic 
Greek  poets ;  like  Rabelais  and  Montaigne,  like  the  dra- 
matists of  the  Restoration,  and  like  Count  Anthony 
Hamilton?  The  histories  of  Gibbon  and  Macaulay,  of 
Parkman,  Prescott,  and  Bancroft,  show  that  the  books 
which  everybody  reads  largely,  draw  their  material  from 


288  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

books  which  nobody  reads.  The  exhaustive  illustrations 
by  which  the  names  of  Dyce  and  Furness  are  linked 
worthily  and  forever  with  the  greatest  name  in  dramatic 
literature ;  the  wealth  of  facts  which  has  been  gathered 
by  Lecky  and  Lea  in  their  classic  monographs,  teach  us 
that  the  information  we  are  all  eager  to  have,  must  be 
wrought  out  from  the  forgotten  mines  to  which  very 
few  can  resort.  The  aggregations  of  a  universal  library 
cannot  be  too  aggregative.  A  library  which  should  give 
to  us  all  editions  of  everything  which  has  ever  been  print- 
ed, and  all  the  manuscripts  worthy  of  preservation  which 
have  ever  been  written,  would  be  a  something  which 
would  make  the  world  give  itself  voice  in  Dominie  Samp- 
son's exclamation.  It  would  be  the  treasure-house  of  all 
scholars,  the  Eldorado  of  the  bibliographer,  the  heaven 
of  the  bibliomaniac,  for  which  the  Panzers  and  Dibdens, 
the  Peignots,  Maittaires,  and  Brunets  would  barter  their 
immortality. 

The  general  library  may  also  be  selective.  Embracing 
many  departments,  it  may  aim  only  at  having  the  most 
important  books  in  each.  This  is  the  prevailing  type  of 
general  libraries.  It  involves  universality  in  plan  with 
selection  in  detail. 

The  special  library  may  also  be  aggregative,  aiming  at 
an  exhaustive  collection  in  its  own  particular  sphere ;  or 
it  may  be  selective,  proposing  to  have  only  the  most 
needed  books  in  its  class.  The  special  theological  library 
may  aim  at  a  universal  gathering  of  theology;  the  law 
library  at  obtaining  all  law  books ;  or  each  may  be  select. 

Or  a  library  may  combine  the  two  elements :  it  may  be 
in  part  both  selective  as  a  general  library  and  aggregative 
in  special  departments;  and  such  a  library  may  be  very 
valuable. 

In  a  word,  a  library  may  be  either  wholly  general  or 
wholly  special  as  to  its  plan  or  purport,  or  it  may  be  both 
with  limitations ;  and  may  be  aggregative  or  selective,  or 
be  both  as  to  its  method.  These  combinations  render- 
possible  a  great  variety  of  libraries. 


i88o.]  PROPORTION,   UNITY,  METHOD.  289 

The  leading  qualities  of  a  good  general  library  are 
these : 

Fairness  of  proportion  and  adaptation.  A  general 
library  must,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  be  a  compromise. 
It  cannot  make  "the  weakest  part  as  strong  as  the  rest." 
To  be  something  to  everybody,  it  must  abandon  the  hope 
of  being  everything  to  anybody.  The  general  library  is  a 
compromise  for  the  general  wants  of  the  body  general. 
The  special  library  is  meant  to  meet  the  special  wants  of 
specialists,  unless  it  be  of  that  very  common  class  whose 
special  character  seems  to  be,  that  it  has  no  definite  or 
indefinite  class  of  wants  to  minister  to.  And  yet  the 
special  library  can  only  seem  exhaustive  by  assuming  a 
very  narrow  plan  for  a  very  narrow  purpose.  The  li- 
brary must  wisely  limit,  contract,  expand  with  reference 
to  all  the  interests  it  represents,  and  must  be  kept  clear  of 
the  fantasies  of  every  sort  of  doctrinaires.  The  general 
library  must  not  lose  sight  of  unity  even  in  variety,  nor 
of  variety  in  unity.  Unity  does  not  exclude  variety,  but 
systematizes  and  guides  it.  Unity  is  not  monotony, 
either  in  nature  or  in  thought,  but  is  a  safeguard  against 
it.  The  monotony  of  confusion — and  the  greater  the 
variety  in  the  things  confused  the  worse  it  is — is  the  most 
distressing  of  all  monotonies,  and  no  variety  carries  you 
along  so  delightfully  as  that  which  works  with  spirit  in 
the  harness  of  order. 

The  library  must  have  a  clear  arrangement.  There 
must  not  only  be  a  place  for  everything  and  everything  in 
its  place,  but  there  must  be  a  third  element,  often  over- 
looked, without  which  the  other  two  are  of  little  avail: 
there  must  be  some  sure  method  of  recalling  where  the 
place  is.  The  scholar  in  his  study  often  follows  nature's 
great  method  as  wrought  out  in  geolog}^ — the  plan  of 
arrangement  by  stratification ;  he  accumulates  things  in  a 
pile  in  the  order  in  which  he  uses  them,  inverted — the 
last  first  at  hand,  the  first  last,  so  that  he  knows  about 
where  a  book  is,  by  recalling  the  time  when  he  was  using 
it  in  his  work,  and  gets  it  by  a  grand  volcanic  upheaval. 
But  this  artless  plan  will  evidently  not  suit  for  public 
^9 


290  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

libraries.  In  order  to  the  complete  embodiment  of  the 
three  principles  of  arrangement,  there  must  be,  first,  a 
careful  classification  in  the  system  of  the  library;  second, 
a  careful  placing  in  order,  and  a  careful  restoration  to 
their  proper  places  of  all  books  which  have  been  removed ; 
third,  careful  cataloguing  and  indexing  of  the  library; 
and,  fourth,  provisions  for  indications  of  the  persons 
taking  out  books,  for  knowing  at  once  in  whose  hands 
any  particular  book  is,  and  a  regular  system  as  to  the 
time  of  their  return  and  the  penalties  which  are  to  correct 
a  disposition  to  delay. 

It  is  impossible  to  overestimate  the  value  of  order, 
classification,  system  in  a  library.  "To  know  where  to 
find  things,"  says  Quenstedt,  though  we  are  far  from 
sure  that  he  was  the  first  to  say  it,  "is  a  large  part  of 
erudition."  The  learned  man  no  more  pretends  to  carry 
all  his  learning  in  his  head,  than  the  rich  man  attempts 
to  carry  all  his  property  in  his  pockets.  The  library 
should  be  so  arranged  as  to  express  well-ordered  learning 
and  to  aid  it.  The  true  librarian  should  be  a  man  of 
learning,  with  a  clear,  logical  brain,  a  thorough,  general 
bibliographical  knowledge  of  books,  capable  of  pointing 
out  to  the  beginner  the  best  books  in  each  department,  and 
even  to  the  scholar,  at  least  the  collateral  literature  of  his 
sphere.  The  librarian  should  have  broad  powers  of  or- 
ganization, and  such  a  man  will  make  the  library,  as  it 
stands,  a  world  not  only  of  good  materials,  but  of  har- 
monious beauty.  This  the  true  library  must  be.  A  good 
classification  of  the  library  is  of  the  highest  importance, 
for  it  forms  a  concrete  definition,  and  its  main  qualities 
should  be  those  of  a  good  logical  definition.  It  should 
embrace  the  whole  in  the  harmony  of  its  parts ;  it  should 
be  on  one  principle ;  it  should  be  as  simple  as  possible ; 
it  should  be  clear,  tangible,  and  practical ;  it  should  avoid 
the  abstruse,  and  should  not  rest  on  dark  and  doubtful 
postulates,  to  which  only  the  contriver  has  the  key.  It 
should  not  be  too  artificial,  but  should  aim  at  confining 
itself  to  distinctions  easily  marked  by  any  one  of  ordinary 
intelligence.    It  should  correspond  strictly  with  its  intent, 


i88o.]  ARRANGEMENT  OF  A   LIBRARY.  291 

which  is  to  put  the  Hbrary  at  the  complete  command  of 
those  who  use  it,  to  facilitate  your  finding  what  you  are 
looking  for,  to  aid  you  in  knowing  what  you  want,  and 
to  bring  together  what  there  is  to  supply  that  want. 

The  books  in  the  library  should  also  actually  be  ar- 
ranged according  to  the  system.  There  are  libraries 
which  are  classified  only  on  paper.  The  books  themselves 
are  in  confusion.  The  books  which  touch  each  other  in 
the  system  may  be  at  opposite  ends  of  the  library.  The 
shelves  bring  together  bedfellows  on  the  principle  of 
misery.  To  give  full  efficiency  to  the  system,  it  must  be 
reflected  by  the  shelves,  as  the  best  companion  to  the 
anatomical  textbook  is  the  skeleton  with  its  parts  in  their 
proper  relation.  The  library  as  it  stands  should  be  an 
index  and  guide  to  knowledge  in  its  order,  a  teacher  of 
system,  a  grand  lesson  in  logic.  It  should  reverse  the 
result  of  the  stratification  of  scholarly  disorder;  the  first 
should  be  first,  the  last  should  be  last. 

The  plans  of  classification  are  very  many,  varying  ac- 
cording to  the  conflicting  judgments,  and  sometimes  in 
accord  with  the  wanton  whims,  of  arrangers.  There  are 
plans  whose  elaborate  ingenuity  imposes  upon  us  at  first, 
which  are  yet  essentially  vicious.  Of  this  class  are  what 
may  be  called  the  metaphysical.  They  are  based  on  a 
certain  theory  as  to  the  human  mind,  or  of  being  in  gen- 
eral. Ontological  and  psychological  classifications  of  a 
library  are  nuisances.  The  inventor  is  trying  to  smuggle 
in  his  speculations  in  the  shape  of  a  catalogue.  They  are 
Trojan  horses,  insidious  and  deceptive,  hollownesses 
stuffed  with  mischiefs.  Prelari's  arrangement  of  a  li- 
brary is  of  this  class.  He  lays  a  basis  in  the  three  primary 
faculties  of  the  mind. — intellection,  memory,  and  imag- 
ination. For  the  intellection  we  have  science;  for  the 
memory,  history;  for  the  imagination,  art.  Science, 
history,  and  art  then  become  subdivisions  with  reference 
to  their  common  subjects,  which  are  either  God,  man,  or 
nature.  In  general  the  arrangement  of  the  library  should 
be  the  logical  modified  by  the  practical. 

The  library  should  aim  at  possessing  the  most  desirable 


292  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

books  for  its  ends.  This  will  be  admitted,  and  then  the 
question  will  rise:  What  are  the  most  desirable  books? 
As  the  most  general  of  libraries  can  only  be  relatively 
universal,  and  the  great  majority  of  libraries  are,  in  their 
plan,  selective,  this  question  means,  in  part.  What  shall 
be  the  first  aim  of  the  aggregative  and  the  constant  aim 
of  the  selective  in  the  choice  of  books  ?  In  general  the  first 
aim  of  a  library  should  be  to  get  the  best  of  the  best.  The 
aim  of  a  public  library  may  be  said,  in  one  aspect,  to  be 
twofold, — to  supplement  private  libraries,  and  to  supply 
the  wants  of  those  who  have  no  libraries  at  all.  For  the 
first  end  it  must  aim  at  having  what  is  relatively  rare ;  for 
the  second,  it  must  embrace  what  is  generally  necessary. 
But  as  provision  for  the  first  end  also  covers  very  largely 
the  needs  looked  at  in  the  second,  a  primary  aim  of  the 
library  should  be,  to  bring  together  good  books  whose 
cost  or  extent  puts  them  out  of  the  reach  of  private 
purses,  or  involves  a  need  for  the  space  which  can  hardly 
be  found  in  a  private  house.  There  are  good  books,  too, 
whose  use  is  real  and  necessary,  yet  is  of  such  rare  oc- 
currence that  one  copy  will  be  enough  for  a  community, — 
the  books  we  do  not  want  often  enough  to  justify  us  in 
purchasing  them,  yet  may  want  very  greatly  when  we 
want  them  at  all.  Many  of  the  indispensable  books  of  a 
library  are  those  which  are  most  rarely  used.  A  book 
which  helps  some  great  scholar  once  in  a  century,  is  of 
more  importance  than  whole  shelves  of  ephemeral  works, 
which  are  early  fingered  into  tatters,  and  then  vanish  into 
eternal  oblivion. 

In  all  cases  the  best  editions  should  be  secured.  The 
latest  editions  of  books  are  often  the  best,  but  by  no 
means  always  so.  Even  in  growing  books  by  living 
authors,  where  the  latest  editions,  into  which  they  have 
introduced  changes,  are  needed,  the  earlier  ones  some- 
times have  a  special  interest  and  value.  A  simple  reprint 
is  not  properly  a  new  edition.  It  is  what  the  Germans 
call  it, — a  title-edition.  An  author  does  not  always  im- 
prove upon  himself.  Tennyson  has  spoiled  some  of  the 
finest  passages  in  his  poems,  for  the  sake  of  invidious  or 


i88o.]  THE  VALUE  OF  OLD  EDITIONS.  293 

prosaic  critics.  Think  of  his  substituting  for  *'The  grand 
old  gardener  and  his  wife,"  "The  gardener  Adam  and  his 
wife,"  accepting  the  prosy  pinchbeck  for  the  gold  which 
glowed  in  his  own  crucible.  Even  if  the  author  does, 
upon  the  whole,  change  for  the  better,  the  earlier  edition 
may  have  value  for  marking  the  growth  in  his  views  or 
for  detecting  changes  in  them.  An  author  so  grows 
away  from  himself  at  times,  that  it  requires  his  own 
books  to  bring  him  to  conviction  and  confession.  To 
study  Kant's  Critique  of  the  Pure  Reason  thoroughly, 
requires  a  comparison  of  its  editions.  Sometimes  an 
older  edition  is  desirable  because,  in  books  which  cite  it, 
the  mass  of  references  is  to  its  paging.  Earlier  editions 
sometimes  contain  valuable  matter,  which  has  been  omit- 
ted to  make  room  for  what  is  new,  without  swelling  the 
size  of  the  book.  The  writers — of  Germany,  especially — 
assume  that  the  reader  has  access  to  the  earlier  editions, 
and  hence  treat  a  subject  with  greater  brevity  because  it 
has  been  handled  by  them  very  fully  before.  The  general 
characteristics  of  best  editions  are  fulness  of  the  matter, 
accuracy  of  text,  and  typographical  beauty ;  to  which  are 
sometimes  to  be  added  the  most  valuable  annotations  and 
the  choicest  pictorial  illustrations. 

The  library  should  possess  the  best  manuals,  hand- 
books, and  other  guides  over  the  realm  of  knowledge. 
It  should  have  the  books  that  are  right  to  begin  with — 
the  books  that  lead  you  on  and  map  the  way,  so  that 
when  you  have  gone  as  far  as  they  can  accompany  you, 
you  know  what  is  the  next  step  to  take.  Books  of 
reference  should  open  to  you  their  own  sources,  and  help 
you  to  see  to  what  they  are  tributary. 

This  class  of  books,  the  books  which  distribute  knowl- 
edge, points  us  to  the  most  important  of  all  the  books 
which  store  it,  the  great  originals  and  mines  of  learning 
and  of  thought.  This  is  the  class  of  books  out  of  which 
other  books  are  made.  They  are  the  primary  sources 
which  are  referred  to  as  ultimate  authorities.  Here  be- 
long the  works  of  immortal  genius,  which  are  constantly 
quoted  as  illustrations,  or  referred  to  as  the  common 


294  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

Storehouse  of  wit  and  wisdom,  of  what  is  grand  and  of 
what  is  lovely,  for  mankind,  those  eternal  things  of 
beauty  which  are  the  joys  of  generations  forever. 

Among  the  sources  a  conspicuous  place  is  held  by  the 
best  periodicals,  which  keep  us  abreast  of  the  depart- 
ments of  knowledge  and  of  letters.  Great  books  are 
reservoirs ;  except  in  new  issues,  they  are  beyond  addition 
and  change.  Good  periodicals  are  flowing  springs,  and 
many  of  the  great  books  are  but  gatherings  of  their 
waters.  Good  newspapers  grow  in  value  by  keeping. 
They  embody  the  practical  philosophy  and  the  living 
blood  of  the  time.  One  day's  issue  of  a  paper  of  the 
highest  order,  gives  more  thorough  insight  into  the  actual 
motion  and  meaning  of  the  time,  than  all  the  statelier 
historical  documents  which  can  be  brought  together.  To 
read  in  its  place,  in  an  ancient  New  England  paper,  an 
advertisement  in  which  a  negro  baby — like  a  superfluous 
puppy  or  a  runt  pig — is  kindly  offered  as  a  gift  to  any- 
body who  will  have  him  and  take  care  of  him,  gives  such 
an  impression  of  the  actual  existence  and  early  decline 
of  slavery  in  that  part  of  our  land,  as  no  amount  of  dry 
annalistic  detail  could  produce.  Suppose  that  posterity 
could  have  had  the  issue  of  a  Roman  press  at  the  era  of 
Csesar's  death,  as  ample  as  that  of  our  greatest  dailies, 
or  that  we  had  an  Imperial  Gazette  of  the  Diet  of  Augs- 
burg, or  files  of  papers  during  the  Thirty  Years'  War, 
or  in  our  own  Revolution,  as  rich  as  the  best  newspapers 
during  and  since  the  great  Rebellion,  what  light  would 
irradiate  what  are  now  the  darkest  problems,  never  to  be 
solved,  and  with  what  absolute  identification  we  could 
live  ourselves  into  the  very  breath  and  passion  and  power 
of  those  memorable  times.  The  daily  papers  of  our 
time,  to  him  who  can  read  them  aright,  are  the  grandest 
epic  of  the  ages.  We  look  in  them  for  the  water-mark 
of  the  highest  flood  of  time.  They  are  the  "certain  scales 
i'  the  pyramid,"  by  which  "they  take  the  flow  o'  the  Nile." 
So  far  from  excluding  good  periodicals  from  the  library, 
its  earliest  provisions  should  embrace  them.  Sift,  but 
do  not  throw  away. 


i88o.]  IMPORTANCE  OF  LOCAL  HISTORY.  295 

Every  general  library  should  be  debtor  to  its  place  and 
surroundings,  unless  they  are  so  great  as  to  require  spec- 
ial collections  of  historical  societies.  It  should  be  the 
storehouse  of  the  locality.  The  fullest  materials  for  the 
history  of  a  place  should  be  found  in  its  library.  The 
library  should  aim  at  being  exhaustive  in  everything 
which  bears  on  the  social  and  educational,  as  well  as  the 
public  life  of  the  place,  and  on  its  institutions  of  every 
kind.  If  it  be  in  a  university  town  it  should  gather  the 
catalogues,  addresses,  and  lives  of  professors  and  pupils, 
everything  by  them  and  about  them,  even  to,  and  indeed 
especially,  the  mock  programmes,  and  all  the  other  crudi- 
ties of  young  wit,  everything  in  print  and  in  manuscript 
which  shall  help  to  show  what  the  place  has  been,  and  is, 
and  which  shall  continue  to  keep  up  its  history  in  the 
future.  Local  histories  are  the  thread-roots  of  the  larger 
histories.  Let  the  local  library,  with  ever  widening  circle, 
take  in  what  belongs  to  its  environments,  but  let  it  grow 
more  and  more  exhaustive  as  it  comes  more  and  more 
closely  on  its  centre.  No  interest  is  so  high,  and  none 
compounds  so  rapidly,  as  that  which  accumulates  on 
historical  documents.  Codices  which  a  convent  of  beg- 
ging monks  hold  at  hardly  more  than  the  valuation  of 
their  parchment,  become  so  transcendently  valuable,  that 
an  empire  alone  is  thought  worthy  to  possess  them,  and 
marks  its  jubilee  of  a  thousand  years  by  publishing  them 
for  the  world.  A  tattered  volume  which  was  worth  a 
few  shillings  or  a  few  pennies,  becomes  a  fortune.  Two 
continents  contest  for  the  possession  of  a  few  ragged 
leaves.  Anniversaries  are  solemnly  kept  and  societies 
organized,  to  commemorate  the  purchase  of  a  single  book. 
If  one  perfect  copy  of  Tyndale's  first  New  Testament 
were  found  in  England,  we  could  no  more  buy  it  from 
her  than  we  could  buy  Canada.  The  Englishman  who 
would  let  it  go  out  of  the  realm,  would  be  looked  upon  by 
English  bibliomaniacs  as  Americans  look  upon  Benedict 
Arnold. 

The  library  will  have  regard  also  to  the  copies  of  its 
books.     It  will  see  to  it  that  they  are  clean  and  choice. 


296  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

It  will  avoid  copies  pared  down  to  the  quick  by  ignorant 
or  unscrupulous  binders,  who  do  not  seem  to  recognize 
that  part  of  the  value  of  every  book,  and  quite  the  whole 
of  the  distinctive  value  of  some  books,  is  in  the  margin. 
Take  away  the  blank  part  of  some  books,  and  a  metamor- 
phosis has  come  over  them  like  that  of  Punch's  pic- 
turesque, hair-matted,  beard-tangled,  Abrahamic-looking 
mendicant,  who  being  retained  by  the  artist  as  a  model, 
for  some  shillings  in  advance,  makes  his  appearance  the 
next  day,  in  grateful  and  respectful  recognition  of  the 
esteem  in  which  he  holds  his  patron,  transformed  by  the 
barber's  shears  and  razor  into  a  villainous  old  tramp, 
with  smooth  cheeks,  short  hair,  and  intolerable  shabby 
primness — ruined  for  art. 

Copies  of  books  once  the  property  of  great  men,  and 
in  which  they  have  made  their  notes,  are  increased  in 
value ;  but  copies  should  be  avoided  which  are  marred  by 
the  inane  annotation  of  common  scribblers,  the  pestilential 
Dogberrys,  who  may  give  us  no  clew  as  to  who  they  are, 
but  write  themselves  down  very  distinctly  what  they  are. 
Happily,  in  one  direction,  this  class  rarely  have  books 
of  their  own  to  ruin  for  the  market,  but  they  must  be 
watched,  for  they  steal  into  libraries  and  shake  their  dead 
flies  into  the  richest  ointments.  Compared  with  the  in- 
decent weaklings  who  take  such  liberties — worse  than 
theft — with  books  which  do  not  belong  to  them,  the  book- 
worms and  other  confessed  vermin  of  the  library  are,  in 
their  artless  mischief,  models  of  infant  innocence. 

Let  these  choice  copies  of  good  books  in  the  best  edi- 
tions be  well  bound.  Let  the  covers  be  strong,  well 
adapted  for  constant  use  and  long  wear.  Let  them  be 
in  sober  colors,  which  do  not  show  handling;  neat,  but 
not  too  elegant  to  be  used  with  comfort.  Let  them  not 
torment,  and  distract  you  from  the  inside,  with  terrors 
about  the  outside.  Have  the  lettering  such  that  the  back 
clearly  tells  what  the  reader  wishes  to  know  before  he 
takes  the  book  down — the  name  of  the  author,  the  general 
subject,  and  in  some  cases  a  notation  of  the  date  and  of 
the  press.      A  great  general  library  inevitably  gathers 


i88o.]  BOOKS  WHICH  ARE  NO  BOOKS.  297 

practical  illustrations  of  many  varieties  of  binding,  but 
it  should  besides  aim  at  having  specimens  of  special 
beauty,  adaptation,  and  ingenuity,  something  character- 
istic of  the  renowned  hands  whose  exquisite  taste  and 
elaborate  manipulation  have  elevated  some  forms  of 
bookbinding  to  a  place  among  the  fine  arts. 

In  the  select  library  beware  of  ballast.  It  is  not  a  suf- 
ficient reason  for  accepting  a  book  that  you  get  it  for 
nothing.  That  is  often  the  dearest  way  of  getting  books. 
Libraries  which  make  it  a  main  dependence,  are  like 
people  who  trust  to  slop  barrels  for  their  family  supplies. 
Many  a  rubbish  heap  which  cheats  itself  with  the  idea  that 
it  is  a  library  is  crowded  with  books  poor  in  themselves, 
or  defective  in  the  edition,  or  broken  in  the  set,  or  muti- 
lated in  the  copy,  or  useless ;  filling  the  space  needed  for 
good  books;  hiding  what  there  may  be  of  merit,  and 
decoying  the  reader  into  hopeless  waste  of  time,  whether 
he  spends  his  time  on  the  trash  that  is  there,  or  throws 
it  away  in  searching  for  a  better  something  which  it  will 
never  furnish  to  his  hand.  The  select  library  may  be  rich 
in  valuable  omissions.  x\s  the  universal  aggregative  can- 
not be  too  aggregative,  the  select  cannot  be  too  select. 
It  may  well  winnow  away  all  the  parasitic  books,  the 
feeble  plagiarisms,  the  books  whose  "pulse  is  theft,"  the 
books  without  brains  and  without  morals,  ribs  of  death 
beneath  which  a  soul  can  never  be  created ;  vague  books 
which  give  us  no  nourishment,  no  pure  enjoyment,  no 
impulse ;  and  most  of  all  the  bad  books,  which  poison 
and  destroy.  In  a  word,  let  the  library  have  books  which 
are  books,  and  avoid  the  books  which  are  no  books.  A 
book  is  a  book  although  there's  nothing  in  it ;  but  it  must 
have  much  in  it  to  be  a  book.  (Stoddart's  Rcvietv.  Vol. 
I,  No.  6.     Philadelphia,  April  17,  1880.) 

Considering  the  care  and  scholarly  ability  with  which 
Dr.  Krauth's  own  library  had  been  selected  and  built  up 
in  the  course  of  years,  we  do  not  wonder  that  some  friends 
seriously  thought  of  purchasing  his  private  library  for 
the  University  of  Pennsylvania.     At  that  time,  (October, 


298  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVI. 

1879,)  he  estimated  the  number  of  his  books  at  15,000, 
with  a  money  value  of  $30,000.  As  he  had,  for  a  number 
of  years,  avoided  purchasing  books  which  were  in  the 
University  Hbrary,  there  would  have  been  but  few  dupli- 
cates added  to  the  University  library  through  this  trans- 
action. Besides,  his  library  was  richest  just  where  the 
University  had  the  greatest  needs,  in  Bibliography, 
Literary  History,  Biblical  Science,  Philosophy  and 
Theology,  the  Fathers  and  Reformers,  History,  Bio- 
graphy, Liturgies,  Encyclopedias  and  Dictionaries,  and 
some  of  the  rarest  great  illustrated  works.  It  may  be 
doubted  if  there  was  another  private  library  in  this  coun- 
try in  which  the  proportion  was  so  great  of  the  books  out 
of  which  other  books  are  made,  and  which  had  such  a 
ratio  of  books  which  are  not  to  be  had  elsewhere.  His 
collection  of  important  Bibles  was  almost  unique  in 
America.  The  library  also  contained  a  large  number  of 
Editiones  Principes  and  of  the  books  from  renowned 
presses,  Aldine,  Stephens,  Elzevir  and  others.* 

It  was  indeed  a  kind  providence  which  overruled  the 
final  disposition  of  this  library  in  such  a  way,  that,  in  the 
eternal  fitness  of  things, 

"  per  varies  casus,  per  tot  discrimina  rerum  " 
it  not  only  became  the  property  of  the  Lutheran  Theo- 
logical Seminary  of  whose  faculty  the  owner  had  been 
the  brightest  ornament;  but  that,  through  the  liberality 
of  a  generous  donor,  at  last, — twenty-five  years  after  Dr. 
Krauth's  death, — it  found  a  suitable,  safe  and  worthy 
home  in  the  magnificent  "Krauth  Memorial  Library"  at 
Mount  Airy,  which  was  fonnally  opened  and  dedicated 
on  June  3,  1908. 

*  Not  only  did  his  library  contain  a  choice  selection  of  rare  books, 
I  think  I  never  saw  a  more  select  professorial  library — but  he  knew 
them,  and  when  I  wanted  a  point  he  would  put  his  hand  upon  the 
book  needed.  He  said  to  me  once  "  If  you  only  possess  six  books, 
put  them  together  in  a  certain  order  of  subjects."  (Caspar  Ren^ 
Gregory.     Letter  to  A.  S.,  Athens,  July  7th  t886.) 


SEVENTEENTH  CHAPTER. 

LITERARY  ACTIVITY  DURING  THE  DECADE    187I-1881. 
THE   CONSERVATIVE   REFORMATION. 

Foremost  among  the  products  of  his  busy  pen  during 
the  latter  part  of  Dr.  Krauth's  hfe,  stands  his  Magnum 
Opus,  "The  Conservative  Reformation  and  its  Theo- 
logy," published  by  J.  B.  Lippincott  &  Co.,  Philadelphia, 
1 87 1.  The  preparation  of  this  work  had  been  urged  by 
some  of  his  devoted  friends  in  Pittsburgh,  who  gen- 
erously offered  to  pay  for  the  stereotype-plates. 

The  original  plan  of  the  book  appears  from  the  fol- 
lowing letter  to  Mr.  Thomas  H.  Lane  in  Pittsburgh. 

4357  Spruce  St.,  Philadelphia,  January  24,  1870. 

My  Dear  Friend: — I  have  not  been  able  up  to  this 
time  to  write  definitely  in  regard  to  the  expenses  which 
would  be  involved  in  the  issue  of  the  "Conservative 
Theology  of  the  Reformation  as  developed  in  the  Augs- 
burg Confession."  I  could  not  go  to  a  publisher  until  I 
clearly  framed  to  my  own  mind  what  I  would  like  to 
have  done.  My  plan  has  recently  matured.  I  have  ready 
for  publication  a  full  discussion  of  the  only  remaining 
point  on  which  I  have  hitherto  not  been  ready  to  publish, 
and  I  now  feel  that  I  should  be  glad  if  the  Providence  of 
God  should  open  to  me  the  means  of  publishing  what  has 
involved  the  earnest  labor,  to  so  large  an  extent,  of  the 
last  twenty-five  years  of  my  life.  Such  a  volume  as  I 
would  wish  to  publish  would  contain  perhaps  500  solidly 
printed  octavo  pages.  I  would  wish  it  printed  in  the 
general  style  of  the  latest  volumes  of  Clark's  Foreign 
Theological  Library.     The  volume  would  match  pretty 

299 


30O  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

well  the  translation  of  Tholuck's  John,  but  the  page 
would  contain  more.  I  would  put  into  it  to  a  consider- 
able extent  what  I  have  published  especially  in  pamphlet 
form,  revised,  with  everything  local  or  personal  re- 
moved. I  would  give  the  matter  I  present,  the  form  in 
which  I  would  wish  to  think  of  it  as  meeting  the  eye  of 
men,  when  I  have  gone  to  my  rest.  The  range  of  topics 
would  be  something  like  this : 

I. — The  nature  of  obligation  to  the  Confessions,  with 
some  account  of  them  all,  especially  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession. The  Review  of  Dr.  Shedd's  History  of  Doc- 
trine. 

II. — Original  Sin,  a  full  Commentary  on  the  second 
article  of  the  Augsburg  Confession. 

III. — The  Person  of  Christ,  with  special,  but  not  ex- 
clusive reference,  to  the  sacramental  presence.  Review 
of  Dr.  Harbaugh. 

IV. — Baptism. 

V. — The  Lord's  Supper. 

VI. — Private  Confession. 

VII.— The  Mass. 

VIII. — The  Liturgies  of  the  Reformation. 

IX. — Christian  Liberty  in  its  relation  to  the  usages 
of  our  Church. 

X. — The  Liturgical  Movement  in  the  Presbyterian  and 
Reformed  Churches. 

XL— The  Sabbath. 

If  there  be  room,  matter  on  the  ministry,  the  Unity  of 
the  Church,  and  so  forth.  There  are  some  other  things 
which  I  would  like  to  introduce,  if  the  space  allowed. 
In  an  appendix,  as  they  would  fill  but  a  few  pages,  I 
might  put  the  documents  of  the  General  Council  which 
are  from  my  pen,  the  call,  the  fundamental  principles, 
the  Constitution.  Perhaps  also  the  Constitution  of  the 
Seminary.  I  propose  also  to  have  a  copious  Index  of 
things  and  authors.  I  think  the  volume  as  I  project  it 
would,  if  the  judgment  of  friends  as  to  the  part  of  it 
which  has  already  appeared  may  be  relied  upon,  meet 


1870-71.]      THE  CONSERVATIVE  REFORMATION.  301 

a  general  want  of  our  own  Church,  of  our  clergy  and 
intelligent  laity,  and  of  our  divinity  students,  and  would 
be  welcome  to  many  out  of  our  Church,  who  wish  to 
know  us,  or  whose  principles  in  many  respects  coincide 
with  our  own. 

As  he  was  ready  to  put  the  closing  pages  of  the  book 
into  the  stereotypers'  hands,  he  wrote  again  to  Mr.  Lane 
(February  16,  1871)  : 

If  the  book  is  adapted  to  the  ends  for  which  I  have 
prayerfully  prepared  it,  it  will  far  more  than  double  the 
value  of  my  life  to  Christ  and  His  Church.  To  you  and 
]\Ir.  Black  I  owe  the  opportunity  of  gathering  into  a 
garner  the  harvest  of  years  of  my  labor.  I  have  tried 
to  make  my  book  a  source  of  strengthening  in  the  faith 
and  of  healing.  Though  its  discussions  go  over  contro- 
verted points  and  are  so  far  controversial,  I  do  not  think 
there  is  a  word  in  it  of  personal  harshness  seemingly,  as 
I  know  there  is  none  in  reality.  I  do  not  think  that  any 
topic  in  the  book  occupies  more  space  than  its  importance 
entitles  it  to,  and  there  are  many  topics  which  I  wished 
to  discuss  which  I  have  been  obliged  to  lay  aside, — I 
hope  not  forever.  Nevertheless  the  book  has  grown 
and  will  occupy  more  than  800  pages.  I  have  tried  to 
make  it  as  nearly  as  I  am  able,  what  I  believe  is  most 
needed.  There  may  be  an  honest  difference  of  opinion 
on  some  points  as  to  exactly  the  best  shape  of  a  book 
for  the  Church's  needs,  but  I  hope  that  the  Providence 
of  God,  and  the  final  judgment  of  the  Church,  will  show 
that  my  judgment  in  the  case  has  not  been  wholly  mis- 
taken. While  I  have  tried  to  be  thorough,  I  have  also 
tried  to  avoid  the  scholastic,  the  technical  and  the  pe- 
dantic. A  thoughtful  man,  with  a  knowledge  of  nothing 
but  English,  can  read  the  book  from  beginning  to  end 
without  any  perplexity  from  the  use  of  learned  citation. 

In  the  final  shape  of  the  book,  which  was  dedicated 
to  the  memory  of  Dr.  Charles  Philip  Krauth,  the  "ven- 


302  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

erated  and  sainted  father"  of  the  author,  the  original 
plan  was  considerably  modified  so  as  to  make  it  a  much 
more  harmonious  unit.  Its  main  force  was  concentrated 
on  the  antagonism  between  the  "Conservative  Reforma- 
tion" as  represented  in  the  Lutheran  Confession,  and 
the  radical  Reformation,  represented  chiefly  in  Zwing- 
lianism;  the  eclecticism  of  the  "Lutheranizing"  Anglican 
Church  having  been  disposed  of  in  the  preface,  by  that 
brief  and  comprehensive  sketch  which  is  one  of  the  finest 
and  most  striking  productions  of  Dr.  Krauth's  pen. 

After  a  historical  introduction,  setting  forth  the  Oc- 
casion and  Cause,  the  Chief  Organ  (Luther)  and  the 
Chief  Instrument  (Luther's  New  Testament)  of  the  Con- 
servative Reformation,  Article  IV  treats  of  the  Lutheran 
Church,  Article  V  of  the  Confessional  Principle  of  the 
Conservative  Reformation,  Articles  VI  and  VII  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  and  the  Formula  of  Concord,  Ar- 
ticle VIII  of  the  History  and  Doctrine  of  the  Con- 
servative Reformation,  and  the  concluding  six  Articles, 
IX  to  XIV,  of  the  specific  doctrines  of  the  Conservative 
Reformation,  Original  Sin,  Person  of  Christ,  Baptism 
and  Lord's  Supper. 

The  really  original  part  of  the  book,  containing  mater- 
ial which-  had  never  been  published  before,  is  found  in 
the  articles  on  the  Lord's  Supper,  covering  considerably 
more  than  one  fourth  of  the  whole  book.  The  rest  con- 
sists of  reprints  of  Review  articles,  pamphlets,  contribu- 
tions to  Church  Papers  and  Class  notes  dictated  to  the 
students  of  the  theological  Seminary  and  partly  printed 
before.  We  can  trace  their  origin  almost  from  page  to 
page  to  the  date  of  their  first  publication,  as  far  back  as 
the  year  1849. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  those  different  publications  of 
earlier  years  have  not  always  been  joined  together  with- 
out flaw,  betraying  the  temporary  character  of  their 
original  composition.     Statements  have  been  left  stand- 


I 


iSji.]  THE  CONSERVATIVE  REFORMATION.  303 

ing,  which  belong  to  an  earHer  stage  of  Dr.  Krauth's 
theological  development,  and  were  clearly  superseded  by 
his  famous  declaration  of  1865  (See  page  115).  Such 
oversight  furnished  weapons  to  his  antagonists  which 
they  were  not  slow  to  use,  as  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown  in  his 
criticism  of  Dr.  Krauth's  theses  on  the  Galesburg  declara- 
tion quoted  passages  from  the  Conservative  Reformation, 
written  in  1862.  (See:  Theses  on  the  Galesburg  Rule. 
Quarterly  Reviezv,  October,  1877.)  We  miss  an  explicit 
statement  with  reference  to  the  fundamental  doctrines 
of  the  Lutheran  Church,  which  were  so  prominent  in 
the  controversies  of  those  days.  We  also  believe  with 
Dr.  J.  A.  Brown*  that  the  introduction  of  that  extensive 
philosophical  argument  on  our  knowledge  of  objective 
realities  (matter)  by  inference  or  faith  rather  than  by 
actual  cognition,  (Conserv.  Reformation,  pp.  787-796) 
might  better  have  been  omitted  from  a  discussion  of  the 
real  presence  of  Christ  in  the  Supper.  But  Dr.  Brown 
completely  misunderstood  and  misrepresented  Dr. 
Krauth's  intentions,  when  he  said,  that  "he  has  ventured 
into  the  most  misty  mazes  of  metaphysics  to  find  support 
for  his  arguments,"  while  the  author  clearly  intends  to 
show  "the  entire  disability  of  philosophy  to  disturb,  by 
any  established  results,  the  simple  Faith  which  rests  on 
the  direct  testimony  of  the  Word."  (Conserv.  Reform., 
page  787. ) 

In  spite  of  these  minor  defects  and  imperfections  the 
"Conservative  Reformation"  was  at  once  recognized, 
both  in  America  and  in  Europe,  by  Lutheran  writers  as 
well  as  by  those  belonging  to  other  denominations,  as 
the  standard  work  on  the  Lutheran  Church  and  her  doc- 
trines in  the  English  language.  It  may  be  of  interest 
to  our  readers  to  see  some  of  the  estimates  of  this  book 

*  Dr.   Krauth's   Metaphysics  of  the  Lord's  Supper.     Quarterly 
Review,  January  1872. 


304  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

as  they  appeared  immediately  after  its  publication  in 
1871. 

Dr.  Caspar  Rene  Gregory,  the  co-worker  and  successor 
of  Dr.  Const.  Tischendorf  in  Leipzig,  writes  in  the  Biblio- 
theca  Sacra  (April,  1875)  :  The  book  has  no  equal  in 
the  presentation  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  The  ease  of 
its  style,  the  carefulness  of  its  research  and  the  solidity 
of  its  argument  commend  it  to  every  scholar. 

Dr.  C.  F.  SchaefTer,  Chairman  of  the  faculty  of  the 
theological  Seminary  in  Philadelphia,  says  in  a  letter  to 
the  author  (May  20,  1871)  : 

My  Dear  Brother  : — I  cannot  express  in  adequate 
terms  my  gratitude  to  you,  not  only  for  the  beautiful 
volume  which  you  have  kindly  sent  me,  but  also,  and  pre- 
eminently, for  the  service  which  you  have  rendered  to 
the  Church  of  Christ  by  your  new  work,  "The  Con- 
servative Reformation  and  its  Theology."  I  congratu- 
late you  sincerely  that  you  have  been  enabled  to  confer 
so  rich  a  boon  on  the  Church;  the  appearance  of  the 
work  really  constitutes  an  era  in  the  history  and  the  theo- 
logical literature  of  the  widely-extended  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church.  No  work  of  such  importance,  or  sO' 
precisely  suited  to  the  wants  of  the  Church  in  this  coun- 
try, has  ever  yet  appeared.  I  have  read,  or  rather, 
studied,  it  only  in  part ;  but  I  feel  very  happy  that  at 
length  so  powerful  a  statement  and  defense  of  revealed 
truth  has  been  given  to  the  Church.  The  subjects  which 
you  discuss  have  occupied  me  in  my  studies  during  the 
last  forty  years,  and  I  have  examined  some  of  the  best 
works  referring  to  them.  But  you  have  succeeded  in 
appropriately  grouping  together  materials  as  none  before 
you,  as  far  as  my  knowledge  extends,  have  yet  doner 
and  you  have  invested  these  subjects  with  a  new  interest. 
I  did  not  believe  that  originality  was  any  longer  possible 
in  this  department :  but  your  researches,  aided  by  a  theo- 
logical library,  such  as  doubtless  no  other  theologian,  at 
least  in  the  United  States,  possesses  in  such  completeness,. 


iSji.]  APPRECIATIIE  LETTERS.  305 

and  your  combinations  are  as  new  and  striking  as  they 
are  well  established  by  documentary  evidence.  The 
extraordinary  accuracy  of  your  historical  statements,  the 
sound  logic  apparent  in  your  reasoning,  the  adaptation 
of  the  matter  to  the  existing  wants  of  the  Church,  the 
vast  learning  which  you  have  gained  and  have  here  made 
of  direct  and  practical  utility,  are  conspicuous  features  of 
the  work. 

The  discussion  of  these  subjects  has  unavoidably 
brought  you  into  conflict  with  other  denominations  who 
entertain  diverse  views.  I  honor  you  for  the  combination 
of  a  manly  and  fearless  candor  with  courtesy,  freedom 
from  intolerance,  and  with  a  sincere  love  of  the  truth. 
I  confess  that  I  have  not  yet  met,  in  the  whole  range  of 
theological  literature,  in  English,  German,  or  French 
books  of  weight  and  learning,  with  such  an  exemplifica- 
tion of  the  "suavitcr  in  modo,  fortiter  in  re,"  as  your 
book  presents. 

Your  work  must  be  of  incalculable  advantage  to  the 
several  communions  which  differ  in  faith  and  practice 
from  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church.  They  have  be- 
fore them,  in  it,  sound  reasoning  and  unquestionable  his- 
torical facts.  And  I  find,  too,  as  another  feature  of  the 
work,  that  while  it  requires  the  theological  reader  to  em- 
ploy all  his  resources  in  studying  it,  a  layman  of  ordinary 
intelligence  is  fully  competent  to  understand  and  to  be 
instructed  and  influenced  by  it.  If  active  measures  are 
adopted  to  make  the  value  of  the  book  known,  every  one 
of  our  Christian  families  would  feel  anxious  to  possess 
such  a  treasure.  I  hope  to  learn  very  much  as  I  proceed 
in  my  study  of  it. 

With  very  sincere  thanks.  I  am  your  brother  in  Christ, 

Charles  F.  Schaeffer. 

1204  Mount  Vernon  St..  Phila. 

Dr.  G.  F.  Krotel  writes  from  New  York  to  the  author 
(June  9,  1871)  : 

Dear  Doctor: — Please  accept  my  heartfelt  thanks  for 
a   copy  of   "The   Conservative   Reformation,"   which   I 


3o6  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

have  now  read  through,  from  the  first  hue  to  the  last,  not 
with  the  thought  that  a  book  hke  this  could  be  disposed 
of  by  a  single  reading,  but  to  count  over  the  jewels  in 
the  casket,  so  as  to  examine  them  more  closely  and  to  use 
them  more  fully  hereafter.  I  look  upon  your  book  as 
the  noblest  contribution  to  the  literature  of  our  Church, 
in  the  English  language,  and  I  doubt  whether  a  similar 
complete  and  exhaustive  work  can  be  found  in  any  other. 
It  will  do  more  than  anything  that  has  been  written,  to 
make  the  doctrines  of  our  Church  plain  to  all  earnest 
and  intelligent  inquirers  outside  of  our  own  ranks,  and 
among  those  who  call  themselves  Lutherans,  it  will  be 
recognized  more  and  more  as  an  unanswerable  refutation 
of  all  the  perversion  and  slander  that  have  been  em- 
ployed against  our  faith,  and  as  a  rich  storehouse  from 
which  thousands  will  draw  for  their  instruction  and  con- 
firmation. A  volume  like  this  will  speak  in  every  theo- 
logical seminary  in  our  Church,  and  although  young  men 
may  be  prevented  from  going  to  Philadelphia,  the  Norton 
Professor  will  have  an  extraordinary  chair  in  every 
lecture-room.  The  theological  world  was  before  in- 
debted to  you  for  some  noble  productions,  but  your  best 
friends  often  wished  that  you  could  see  your  way  clear 
to  embody  the  results  of  your  prolonged  studies  espec- 
ially in  the  department  of  our  own  theology,  in  a  work 
equal  to  the  claims  of  the  subject  and  your  scholarship. 
I  think  we  have  reason  to  hail  the  book  now  before  us 
as  the  ripe  fruit  for  which  we  have  longed.  While  every 
part  of  the  book  is  exceedingly  valuable,  the  Church  owes 
you  special  thanks  for  the  extensive  and  most  thorough 
treatment  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  I 
do  not  know  where  to  find  a  treatise  like  it. 

Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs,  in  an  extensive  review  of  the  book, 
first  offered  to  the  Gettysburg  Quarterly  Review,  and,  as 
it  was  refused  by  the  editors,  published  in  the  Mercers- 
burg  Review  (January,   1872,)   says: 

The  spirit  in  which  this  work  was  written,  was  jealousy 
for  the  truth,  which  shuns  all  disguises,  and  in  all  things 


1 


iSji.j  DR.  NEVIN'S  REVIEW.  307 

seeks  after  clearness,  definiteness,  certainty.  ...  It  is 
the  most  learned  and  profound  of  all  theological  works 
prepared  by  American  divines. 

One  of  the  most  appreciative  reviews,  which  fully 
grasped  the  significance  of  the  work  both  for  the  Luth- 
eran Church  and  for  Protestantism  at  large,  appeared  in 
the  Reformed  Messenger  (October  4,  1871,)  from  the 
pen  of  Dr.  Krauth's  friend,  Dr.  J.  \V.  Nevin.     He  says : 

Dr.  Krauth  is  known  as  one  of  the  first  writers  of  our 
country.  The  gentleman,  the  Christian,  and  the  scholar 
are  happily  blended  in  his  person.  He  is  one  of  the  pil- 
lars of  his  own  Church  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic,  and 
one  of  the  ornaments  of  our  American  Christianity  in 
general. 

The  subject  of  the  volume  before  us  is  of  vital  signifi- 
cance, not  only  for  the  Lutheran  Church,  but  for  the 
Protestant  world  at  large.  For  the  cause  here  main- 
tained is  not  just  that  of  Protestantism  over  against  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church.  It  is  what  is  styled  the  Con- 
servative Reformation,  a  title  which  looks  not  to  Rome 
only,  but  quite  as  much  to  the  opposite  of  Rome,  and  im- 
plies that  all  reformation,  other  than  Lutheran,  must 
be  considered  not  conservative ;  in  other  words,  radical 
and  unsound.  In  this  view  the  book,  however  peaceful 
and  loving  in  tone,  is  in  fact  severely  polemic  in  spirit 
toward  all  Protestantism  which  is  not  strictly  of  the 
original  Lutheran  type.  It  is  not  a  lamb-like  apology-  for 
Old  Lutheranism,  the  most  that  was  to  be  thought  of 
here  in  America  a  generation  ago ;  it  is  a  formidable  lion- 
like assault,  we  may  say,  on  the  entire  Reformed  Con- 
fession, technically  so-called,  to  which  this  stood  intoler- 
antly opposed  in  the  i6th  Century.  The  Reformed,  or 
non-Lutheran,  confession  has  since  fallen  asunder  into 
so  many  other  names,  and,  in  this  country  especially, 
has  so  lost  all  sense  for  historical  confessionalism,  that 
few  belonging  to  it  have  any  clear  apprehension  of  what 
the  generic  title  really  means ;  and  for  this  reason  our 


3o8  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

American  denominations  generally  may  be  slow  to  un- 
derstand, or  feel  at  all,  the  force  of  the  great  issue  in 
which  they  are  here  really  involved.  It  should  be  borne 
in  mind,  however,  that  not  only  our  Reformed  Churches, 
properly  so  called,  Dutch  and  German,  but  all  our  evan- 
gelical sects,  Congregationalists,  Presbyterians,  Metho- 
dists, Baptists,  and  others  (not  excepting  the  Episco- 
palians), belong  generically,  and  in  a  way  deeper  than  all 
these  distinctions,  to  the  Reformed  wing  of  Protestanism 
in  difference  from  its  Lutheran  wing ;  so  that  they  are  all 
of  them  in  truth  put  on  trial  by  this  book  of  Dr.  Krauth, 
and  called  upon  to  give  account  of  the  faith  that  is  in 
them,  not  as  divergent  from  one  another  (that  is  of 
secondary  superficial  moment),  but  as  all  diverging  to- 
gether from  the  conservative  and  only  sound  Protestant 
orthodoxy  of  the  old  Lutheran  Confession.  So  great  is 
the  question  here  at  stake ;  and  such  the  mighty  challenge 
it  presents  to  our  whole  American  Christianity,  outside 
of  the  Lutheran  Church. 

At  the  same  time,  as  already  intimated,  the  challenge 
is  not  of  a  sort  to  be  treated  with  contempt.  It  is  not  the 
cry  of  blustering  ignorance,  nor  of  fanatical  rant.  The 
book  is  of  the  heavy  artillery  order,  large  in  size  (840 
pages  octavo),  ponderous  in  bearing,  vigorous  in  style, 
and  energetic  in  thought.  No  one  who  has  seen  Dr. 
Krauth  in  his  own  magnificent  library  (one  of  the  finest 
in  the  whole  country),  or  who  has  known  anything  of 
his  laborious  studies  in  past  years,  can  undervalue  or 
doubt  his  qualification  for  the  task  he  has  here  under- 
taken. It  may  be  doubted  if  any  other  man  in  our  coun- 
try could  have  handled  this  particular  subject  with  the 
same  ability,  or  the  same  amount  of  historical  learning. 
Simply  for  the  literature  of  the  subject,  the  book  is  a 
thesaurus  of  information,  which  of  itself  may  be  taken 
as  a  sufficient  argument  of  its  more  than  common  worth. 

I  welcome  this  learned  work  of  Professor  Krauth  as 
a  most  important  contribution,  not  only  to  the  cause  of 
true  and  sound  Lutheranism  among  us,  but  also  to  the 


i87i.]  DR.  NEVIN'S  REVIEW.  309 

cause  of  true  and  sound  Protestantism  in  general,  so 
far  as  our  American  Church  is  concerned. 

The  work  marks  the  advance  of  a  highly  interesting 
and  significant  restorational  movement  in  the  historical 
life  of  the  American  Lutheran  Church  itself.  We  all 
know  that  half  a  century  ago,  Lutheranism  in  this  coun- 
try had  fallen  away  almost  entirely  from  the  distinctive 
peculiarities  of  what  Lutheranism  was  confessionally  in 
the  1 6th  Century.  In  becoming  English  especially,  it 
was  supposed  to  have  gone  through  a  sort  of  evangelical 
regeneration,  which  consisted  largely  in  forgetting  its 
own  shibboleths  altogether,  and  taking  up  those  of  Puri- 
tanism and  Methodism.  It  affected  to  be  in  this  way 
"American  Lutheranism,"  something  quite  ahead  of  all 
mediaeval  fooleries,  and  fit  to  figure  in  the  19th  Century. 
It  is  not  to  be  forgotten  accordingly,  that  when  we,  of 
Mercersburg,  groping  toward  the  truth  in  our  poor, 
stumbling  Reformed  way  (even  so  lately  as  only  thirty 
years  since),  began  to  bear  testimony  to  sacramental  and 
churchly  ideas,  so  far  only  as  they  had  been  the  common 
heritage  of  the  two  great  Confessions  in  the  beginning, 
we  found  no  countenance  or  backing  whatever  from  the 
Americanized  Lutheran  Church.  On  the  contrary,  it  took 
the  lead  in  defending  the  anxious  bench  as  virtually  a 
surrogate  for  Baptism,  in  denying  all  mystical  character 
to  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  in  helping  forward  the  hue 
and  cry,  by  which  it  was  attempted  from  all  sides,  in  those 
days,  to  overwhelm  with  theological  odium  the  German 
Reformed  Church.  We  need  to  recall  this  to  mind  now, 
only  to  see  how  much  is  involved  in  the  great  change 
which  has  since,  in  so  short  a  time,  come  over  the  spirit 
of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  this  country,  as  indicated  by 
the  everv--  way  massive  defense  of  the  "Conservative 
Reformation,"  which  is  presented  to  us  in  Dr.  Krauth's 
book,  and  the  book,  as  I  now  say.  deserves  to  be  wel- 
comed, both  as  an  evidence  of  this  favorable  change,  and 
as  an  important  contribution  to  its  progress. 

But  in  the  view  already  referred  to,  I  hold  it  to  be  of 
valuable  account  also  for  the  cause  of  our  Evangelical 


3IO  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

American  Protestantism  generally.  Whatever  other 
issues  and  questions  this  may  have  to  do  with,  in  the 
progress  of  its  multifarious  denominational  existence, 
one  thing  is  certain :  these  are  only  of  relatively  secondary 
significance  over  against  the  issues  that  lie  at  the  ground 
of  Protestantism  itself,  first  in  the  protest  against  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  then,  secondly,  in  the  rup- 
ture of  its  own  two  great  Confessions,  by  which  it  be- 
came at  the  beginning  Lutheran  and  Reformed.  No 
man  can  be  a  true  Protestant  who  has  not  seen  and  felt 
keenly  the  truth  which  there  is,  and  has  been  from  the 
beginning,  in  the  old  Catholic  Church.  And  just  so,  no 
man  can  be  an  intelligent  Lutheran  or  Reformed  Protest- 
ant who  has  not  come  to  understand  and  feel  the  confes- 
sional edge  of  the  system  opposite  to  his  own.  Luther- 
anism,  affecting  to  be  the  sum  total  of  the  Reformation, 
and  having  no  sense  or  appreciation  for  Reformed 
Christianity  (Swiss,  French,  Belgic,  English,  Scotch), 
must  ever  fail  to  do  justice  to  itself,  or  to  be  what  it 
should  be  for  Protestantism  at  large;  and  just  as  little 
can  the  Reformed  Confession  do  justice  to  itself,  or  know 
the  meaning  of  itself  in  the  world,  without  regard  to  the 
relation  with  which  it  has  been  bound  historically,  to  the 
great  Lutheran  Confession,  from  the  beginning.  But  of 
this  we  have  had  thus  far  almost  no  sense  whatever  in 
our  reigning  American  denominationalism.  Our  differ- 
ent branches  of  the  Reformed  Church — Presbyterian, 
Methodist,  Episcopalian,  Low  Dutch,  Congregationalist, 
Baptist — have  been  in  the  habit  all  along  of  ignoring 
Lutheranism  almost  entirely  (true  Lutheranism  I  mean, 
and  not  the  hollow  name  of  it  simply),  as  if  it  had  ac- 
tually long  ago  died  out  of  the  life  of  Protestantism,  and 
had  nothing  further  to  do  with  it,  no  more  than  Roman- 
ism itself.  Strange  fate  of  Luther,  may  we  not  say, 
to  be  everlastingly  magnified  among  us,  and  yet  thus  on 
all  sides  put  to  shame,  through  the  quiet  repudiation  of 
what  he  held  to  be  the  only  true  idea  of  the  Gospel ! 
Even  in  our  theological  seminaries,  as  a  general  thing, 
no  earnest  regard  has  been  had,  either  to  Lutheran  history 


i87r.l  DR.   XEl'LVS  REIIEIV.  31 1 

or  Lutheran  divinity.  In  this  way  faith  has  been  simph- 
fied,  and  theology  made  plain ;  but  the  result  is  a  com- 
paratively one-sided,  shallow  development  of  theological 
thought,  and  a  much  poorer  Christianity  every  way,  than 
we  would  have  had,  if  the  old  confessional  issues  had  not 
been  thus  summarily  thrust  aside. 

In  these  circumstances,  then,  it  is  a  matter  for  real 
congratulation,  I  repeat,  that  the  Lutheran  Church  is  in 
a  fair  way  to  become  far  more  of  a  power  in  our  country 
than  it  has  heretofore  been ;  and  there  is  room  to  look 
also  for  the  resurrection  of  a  live  Lutheran  theology 
among  us,  in  the  spirit  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  which 
may  yet  force  its  claims  on  the  attention  of  our  one- 
sided (and  therefore  more  or  less  lop-sided)  Reformed 
Protestantism,  so  as  to  exert  upon  it  in  the  end  a  sanitary 
modification  in  which  both  Confessions  may  have  reason 
to  rejoice. 

Dr.  Krauth's  book,  too  respectable  a  great  deal  to  be 
lightly  overlooked  by  our  un-Lutheran  denominations,  is 
a  highly  interesting  phenomenon  or  sign  of  the  times  in 
this  view.  It  marks  a  sort  of  epoch  in  what  may  yet 
prove,  as  it  certainly  ought  to  prove,  a  new,  far-reaching 
departure  in  the  theological  life  of  our  land.  It  remains 
to  be  seen,  however,  whether  it  will  gain  any  hearing  or 
not,  where  it  ought  to  be  heard.  Altogether  it  is  a  curious 
question,  how  far  genuine  old  Lutheranism  has  any 
chance  to  live  here  in  America,  speaking  the  English 
language,  and  breathing  the  crisp  air  of  the  19th  Century. 

Dr.  C.  E.  Luthardt,  in  Leipzig,  wrote  to  the  author 
(December  28,  1874)  : 

With  great  interest  and  joy  I  noticed  your  work,  this 
learned  historical  and  dogmatical  defense  of  our  Luth- 
eran Church  and  her  doctrine,  and  I  thank  God  that  in 
you  He  has  given  to  our  Church  in  America  such  a  well- 
equipped  and  influential  representative  of  her  theology. 
Considering  the  great  and  trying  work  of  our  Church  in 
America  in  the  practical  field,  we  must  be  all  the  more 


312  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

thankful  to  God  that  theological  science  also  is  repre- 
sented in  such  a  comprehensive  and  prominent  manner. 
I  thank  you  for  the  service  you  have  done  to  our  Church 
through  this  great  work,  and  which  you  are  constantly 
doing  by  your  activity  as  a  scholarly  theologian.  The 
more  the  Lutheran  Church  is  hemmed  in  and  handi- 
capped in  Germany,  and  the  darker  the  prospects  are  for 
her  future,  so  that  it  may  be  doubted  whether  she  will 
still  have  a  future  before  her,  the  more  we  are  comforted 
and  encouraged  by  watching  her  progress  and  prosperity 
in  America. 

Over  against  such  general  and  hearty  appreciation  of 
the  value  of  the  book,  it  may  seem  strange  that  the 
Lutheran  and  Missionary  treated  its  appearance  with 
peculiar  reserve,  not  to  say  indifference.  It  did, 
indeed,  announce  the  appearance  of  the  "Conserva- 
tive Reformation"  in  its  issue  of  June  29,  1871,  as  one 
of  "three  grand  volumes,  which  together  make  as  noble 
an  exhibition  of  divine  grace  and  truth,  in  the  history  of 
the  Church,  as  can  be  produced.  These  works  are 
EccLESiA  LuTHERANA,  by  Dr.  Seiss;  The  Lutheran 
Reformation,  by  Dr.  Greenwald;  and  The  Conserva- 
tive Reformation,  by  Dr.  Krauth."  The  Lutheran  and 
Missionary  likewise  published  some  private  letters  and 
communications  from  Drs.  C.  F.  Schaeffer,  T.  Stork,  G. 
F.  Krotel  and  H.  I.  Schmidt,  of  Columbia  College,  New 
York,  and  reprinted  the  main  part  of  Dr.  Nevin's  review. 
But  editorially  it  made  very  little  of  "The  Conservative 
Reformation."  This  attitude  finds  its  explanation  in  a 
letter  from  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss  (July  7,  1871,)  in  which  he 
says: 

I  have  not  yet  had  time  to  read  it,  so  as  to  make  up  a 
digested  judgment  of  it,  but  I  have  read  enough  to  make 
me  feel  that  we  are  all  under  the  greatest  obligations  to 
you  for  writing  it,  and  to  our  God  for  enabling  you  to 


i87i.]  DR.  JOEL  SWARTZ'S  ARTICLE.  313 

write  it.  I  also  agree  with  Dr.  M.  (Morris?)  that  more 
should  be  made  of  it  in  our  paper,  but  as  the  whole  busi- 
ness interest  of  its  publication  is  in  another  house,  which 
has  never  shown  us  any  favors,  I,  for  one,  have  not  the 
heart  to  do  for  that  house  what  I  would  very  cheerfully 
award  to  you  and  to  the  book.  The  truth  is  that  it  has 
been  a  considerable  disheartenment  to  me,  after  all  the 
personal  sacrifices  I  have  made,  and  am  still  making,  to 
get  up  a  book-store  for  our  Church,  that  a  book  so  im- 
portant, so  particularly  identified  with  our  own  Church, 
has  to  be  accepted  and  worked  in  the  business  interests  of 
another  house,  to  the  public  discredit  of  our  ow^n  establish- 
ment. I  do  not  mention  this  in  the  way  of  complaint  or 
censure,  but  simply  to  explain  why  it  is  impossible  for 
me  to  feel  the  same  enthusiasm  in  this  desirable  publica- 
tion which  I  would  like  to  show.  And  I  am  sure,  when 
you  look  at  all  the  relations  and  facts  in  the  case,  that 
you  will  not  think  or  feel  the  less  of  me,  for  candidly 
adverting  to  the  unfavorable  attitude  for  doing  what  I 
think  the  book  eminently  merits. 

Dr.  Joel  Swartz,  a  prominent  member  of  the  General 
Synod,  wrote  an  appreciative  article  on  the  "Conserva- 
tive Reformation,"  published  in  the  Lutheran  Observer. 
Dr.  Krauth  thanks  him  in  a  letter  dated  January  4,  1876, 
in  which  he  says : 

Most  of  the  book  was  written  while  I  was  in  the  Gen- 
eral Synod.  None  of  it  was  written  in  a  polemical  spirit 
against  any  portion  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  .  .  .  Your 
article  (The  Catholicity  of  the  "Conservative  Reforma- 
tion") has  better  expressed  than  anything  that  has  been 
written  about  it,  part  of  the  spirit  and  intent  of  my  book. 
I  do  not  believe  any  man  living  has  an  intenser  desire 
than  I  have,  for  the  true  unity  of  the  Church  of  our  Lord. 
If  I  am  very  Lutheran  it  is  because  the  Lutheranism  I 
love  is  so  truly  Catholic,  not  in  the  sense  however  of 
latitudinarianism,  syncretism  or  pseudo-unionism,  but  in 
this,  that  it  fixes  on  the  real  centre  of  unity,  to  wit,  the 


314  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XVU. 

pure  Gospel,  and  offers  in  its  Confessions  the  most  per- 
fect Symbol  on  earth  of  that  Gospel.  I  believe  that  the 
greatest  work  we  Lutherans  can  do  for  the  unity  of  the 
whole,  is  to  secure  unity  among  ourselves.  I  am  opposed 
to  Unionism  because  I  am  desirous  of  unity.  Just  as  far 
as  my  book  helps  Lutherans  to  be  Lutheran, — that  is, 
New  Testament  Christians  holding  the  old  faith  and 
living  the  new  life — just  so  far  does  it  contribute  to  the 
great  end  for  which  we  are  all  laboring,  the  building  up 
of  the  great  Church  Catholic  of  our  Lord. 

INFANT      BAPTISM      AND      INFANT      SALVATION      IN      THE. 
CALVINISTIC   SYSTEM. 

In  the  "Conservative  Reformation"  Dr.  Krauth  had 
stated  (p.  434)  that  the  Calvinistic  system  places  the 
salvation  of  infants  on  the  ground  of  divine  election,  and 
speaks  of  elect  infants;  and  hence,  in  its  older  and  more 
severely  logical  shape  at  least,  supposed  not  only  that 
some  unbaptized,  but  also  that  some  baptized  infants  are 
lost.  Dr.  Charles  Hodge,  in  his  Systematic  Theology 
which  appeared  shortly  after  the  "Conservative  Reforma- 
tion," took  exception  to  these  statements  in  such  a  man- 
ner that  he  compelled  Dr.  Krauth  either  to  defend  his 
position,  or  to  accept  the  reference  of  Dr.  Hodge  as  a 
correction.     Dr.  Hodge  says : 

We  are  sorry  to  see  that  Dr.  Krauth  labors  to  prove 
that  the  Westminster  Confession  teaches  that  only  a 
certain  part,  or  some  of  those  who  die  in  infancy,  are 
saved;  this  he  does  by  putting  his  own  construction  on 
the  language  of  the  Confession.  We  can  only  say  that 
we  never  saw  a  Calvinistic  theologian  who  held  the  doc- 
trine. We  are  not  learned  enough  to  venture  the  asser- 
tion that  no  Calvinist  ever  held  it;  but  if  all  Calvinists  are 
responsible  for  whatever  a  Calvinist  has  said,  and  all 
Lutherans  are  responsible  for  everything  Luther  or  Luth- 
erans have  ever  said,  then  Dr.  Krauth  as  well  as  ourselves 
will  have  a  heavy  burden  to  carry. 


i874.]  INFANT   SALVATION.  315 

Dr.  Krauth  took  up  the  gauntlet  in  a  review  of  Dr. 
Hodge's  Systematic  Theology,  written  for  the  Mercers- 
burg  Rez'iezv  (Vol.  XXI,  p.  99)  and  afterwards  pub- 
lished in  more  complete  form  by  the  Lutheran  Book 
Store  (Infant  Baptism  and  Infant  Salvation  in  the 
Calvinistic  System.     Philadelphia,   1874.     83  pages.) 

Dr.  Thomas  G.  Apple  urged  him  to  furnish  an  article 
on  this  subject.  In  the  year  1869  his  elaborate  and 
scholarly  article  on  The  Liturgical  Movement  in  the 
Presbyterian  and  Reformed  Churches,  had  appeared  in 
the  Merccrsbiirg  Review.  And  now  Dr.  Apple  writes 
(November  29,   1873)  : 

It  will  be  a  favor  to  have  you  appear  in  our  Review 
again.  .  Just  now  the  tendency  is  toward  Pan-Presby- 
terianism.  After  awhile,  I  trust,  a  greater  question,  the 
drawing  together  of  Lutheran  and  Reformed  may  come 
forward.  Looking  to  this  I  am  prepared  to  see  Cal- 
vinism sifted,  and  if  it  convicts  some  of  our  own  theo- 
logians of  earlier  times  of  being  on  the  wrong  track, — 
all  right!    We  do  not  stand  there  now. 

Dr.  Krauth's  argument  is  in  substance  as  follows:  The 
Calvinistic  system  places  the  salvation  of  infants  on  the 
ground  of  a  divine  election  of  individuals,  distinctly  rec- 
ognizing elect  infants,  and  thus  the  existence  also  of 
reprobate  infants.  It  teaches  that  all  infants  deserve 
damnation,  that  the  election  of  God  alone  can  save  them, 
and  that  this  election  does  not  extend  to  all  infants ;  thus 
making  the  conclusion  irresistible  that  some  infants  must 
perish.  It  further  maintains  a  "certain  presumption," 
that  the  children  of  unbelievers  are  lost.  It  denies  that 
the  time  of  the  child's  death  is  in  any  way  connected  with 
the  probability  of  its  election.  It  holds  that  the  rights  of 
infants  in  the  Church  are  hereditary  rights,  and  thus 
runs  out  into  a  Judaizing  construction  of  the  covenant, 
especially  by  teaching  that  the  neglect  to  have  a  child 


3i6  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

baptized,  cuts  off  that  child  from  the  covenant.  A  doubt 
that  the  parent  is  elect,  casts  doubt  on  the  presumption 
that  the  child  is  elect.  According  to  logical  Calvinism, 
no  parent  can  have  any  real  assurance  in  regard  to  any 
particular  child  that  it  is  elect,  sanctified  and  in  the 
covenant. 

The  relation  of  the  Calvinistic  system  to  the  means 
through  which  infants  are  brought  into  a  state  of  grace, 
is  thoroughly  examined.  Calvinism  rests  the  validity 
of  Baptism  not  on  what  it  brings,  but  on  what  it  finds. 
Baptism  is  not  a  means  of  grace,  according  to  the  Cal- 
vinistic system,  but  grace  is  a  means  of  real  Baptism. 
We  are  baptized  not  in  order  to  obtain  grace,  but  be- 
cause we  are  supposed  already  to  have  it.  Calvinism 
gives  prominence  to  the  idea  that  non-elect  infants  re- 
ceiving Baptism,  receive  no  benefit;  that  Baptism  should 
not  be  administered  to  the  children  of  unbelievers ;  that 
this  class  of  infants  is  not  only  unfit  for  Baptism,  but  also 
incapable  of  salvation.  It  presents  no  logical  ground 
against  the  Anabaptist  rejection  of  infant  Baptism,  and 
grants  that  it  does  not  know,  whether  in  any  one  case  the 
Baptism  of  an  infant  is  anything  more  than  a  mere 
form  which,  in  no  case,  conditions  or  bears  upon  the 
salvation  of  the  child.  Although  it  maintains  not  only 
the  possibility,  but  also  the  absolute  necessity  of  the 
regeneration  of  infants,  it  knows  of  no  means  for  that 
regeneration,  and  no  assurance  of  faith  that  that  particu- 
lar child  is  regenerate. 

In  the  controversies  between  Calvinism  on  the  one  side, 
and  the  Romanists.  Pelagians  and  Arminians  on  the 
other,  the  Calvinistic  theologians  unhesitatingly  affirmed 
that  all  children  of  unbelievers  dying  in  infancy,  as  well 
as  many  infant  children  of  believers,  are  lost.  The 
various  efforts  to  modify  such  a  doctrine  are  recounted, 
made  by  milder  Calvinists  who  shrank  back  from  it. 
Some  have  virtuallv  resorted  to  the  Romish  doctrine  of  a 


1 874]  CALF IX ISM  CHALLENGED.  317 

liiiibiis  infantuui,  maintaining  that  non-elect  infants  were 
consigned  to  eternal  woe,  but  punished  there  in  the  mild- 
est way.  Others  tried  to  believe  that  reprobate  infants 
are  annihilated  at  death.  Others,  like  Dr.  Hodge  him- 
self, in  opposition  to  their  system,  believed  that  all  who 
die  in  infancy  are  saved.  Still  others  have  manifested  a 
Lutheranizing  tendency  by  holding,  in  opposition  to  their 
system,  the  objective  force  of  Baptism,  and  maintaining 
that  sacraments  are  not  only  signs  and  seals  but  also 
means  of  grace.  Finally  Dr.  Krauth  challenges  the  de- 
fenders of  Calvinism  to  produce  a  solitary  Calvinistic 
standard  or  divine,  from  the  first  Helvetic  Confession  to 
the  Westminster  Confession,  or  from  Calvin  to  Twiss,  in 
which  or  by  whom,  it  is  asserted  or  implied,  that  all  who 
die  in  infancy  are  certainly  saved.* 

Dr.  Hodge's  answer  to  Dr.  Krauth's  argument  and 
challenge  is  contained  in  the  following  letter. 

Princeton,  April   15,   1874. 

My  Dear  Sir: — I  have  to  thank  you  for  a  copy  of 
your  article  on  Infant  Salvation  in  the  Calvinistic 
System. 

I  feel  greatly  indebted  to  you  for  the  kind  manner  in 
which  you  speak  of  my  theology,  and  for  the  more  than 
kind  manner  in  which  you  speak  of  me  personally.  I  am 
very  sensible  of  my  obligations  to  you  for  your  favorable 
judgment. 

Your  paper  proves  that  you  are  far  better  read  in 
Calvinistic  Theology  than  I  am.  In  preparing  my  book 
I  determined  to  present  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformed, 
Lutheran.  Romish  and  Remonstrant  Churches  in  the 
language   of   their   acknowledged   standards,    and    refer 

*  "  Dr.  Krauth,  younger  but  better  read  in  history  than  his  oppon- 
ent,— we  are  loath  to  say  it,  for  one  is  a  perfect  stranger  to  us,  and 
the  other  was  once  our  admired  instructor, — has  been  quite  too  much 
for  Princeton's  giant.  David  has  slain  Goliath."  The  American  Church 
Review,  October,  1874. 


3i8  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

only  for  illustration  to  their  theologians.  The  Reformed 
Symbols  nowhere  teach  the  necessity  of  Baptism  to  the 
salvation  of  infants.  The  Symbols  of  the  Lutheran  and 
Latin  Churches  do  expressly  teach  that  doctrine.  This 
seems  to  me  to  make  a  great  difference.  The  Reformed 
do  indeed  teach  that  none  but  the  elect  are  saved ;  but 
their  Symbols  do  not  teach  that  children  dying  in  infancy 
are  excluded  from  the  number  of  the  elect.  All  Cal- 
vinists  therefore  may  consistently  believe  in  infant  sal- 
vation, and  I  have  never  seen  or  known  a  Calvinist  who 
disbelieves  it. 

I  do  not,  however,  intend  to  discuss  the  question,  and 
regret  that  there  is  any  point  on  which  you  and  myself 
are  constrained  to  differ. 

Respectfully  and  affectionately, 

Your  friend  and  brother, 

Charles  Hodge. 

A  few  years  after  this  controversy,  which  culminated 
in  this  remarkably  frank  and  honorable  letter,  Dr. 
Charles  Hodge  departed  this  life ;  and  when  his  son.  Dr. 
A.  A.  Hodge,  prepared  a  memoir  of  his  father,  he  asked 
Dr.  Krauth  to  contribute  his  estimate  as  to  his  father's 
place  in  the  current  history  of  theology. 

What  I  wanted  from  you,  he  says  in  a  letter  of  De- 
cember 8,  1879,  was  the  truth,  but  the  friendly  side  of 
the  truth,  as  to  his  position  in  the  course  of  American 
Theology  and  Theologians.  Such  an  estimate  is  im- 
possible without  perspective,  and  perspective  is  impossible 
without  proportionate  distance,  either  of  time  or  of  space 
or  of  general  position.  It  seems  to  me  that  your  opinion 
would  be  more  discriminating  and  valuable  than  that  of 
any  other  man  in  the  United  States,  because  I  think  you 
have  the  proportionate  distance.  You  are  one  with  him 
at  bottom,  because  you  both  stand  up  for  the  old  con- 
fessional and  classical  theology  of  the  Reformation.  You 
neither  have  part  with  the  rationalistic  dry-rot  of  the 
present  age,  nor  with  its  latitudinarianism  and  unhistor- 


1862-83.]       PERSONAL  TIES  WITH  PRINCETON.  319 

ical  Low-Chiirchism.  And  yet  you  belong  to  different 
grand  divisions  of  the  kingdom.  ...  It  is  not  a  eulogy 
I  want,  but  a  critical  estimate  of  his  place  as  a  theologian, 
yet  a  critical  estimate  not  as  dry  and  rigid  as  will  be 
proper  fifty  years  hence,  but  as  will  be  congruous  in  a 
Memoir  prepared  for  friends  and  pupils,  by  his  son,  a 
year  or  two  after  his  death. 

The  result  of  this  correspondence  was  the  insertion  in 
Dr.  Hodge's  Memoir  of  the  very  words  Dr.  Krauth  had 
used  in  his  polemical  article,  to  skietch  the  personality  and 
the  theology  of  his  beloved  and  venerated  antagonist! 
His  tribute  closes  with  these  characteristic  words :  "Next 
to  having  Dr.  Hodge  on  one's  side  is  the  pleasure  of  hav- 
ing him  as  an  antagonist ;  for  where  conscientious  men 
must  discuss  a  subject,  who  can  express  the  comfort  of 
honorable,  magnanimous  dealing  on  both  sides — the 
feeling  that  in  battling  with  each  other,  they  are  also 
battling  for  each  other,  in  that  grand  warfare  whose  final 
issue  will  be,  what  all  good  men  desire,  the  establish- 
ment of  truth." 

For  more  than  twenty  years,  the  personal  relations  and 
literary  associations  between  Dr.  Krauth  and  the  faculty 
of  the  theological  seminary  at  Princeton,  particularly 
Drs.  Green,  Shields  and  Chas.  Hodge,  were  of  the  most 
intimate  and  pleasant  character.  His  honest  and  con- 
sistent Lutheranism  never  interfered  with  their  high 
appreciation  of  his  scholarly  attainments,  and  of  the 
graces  of  his  strong  Christian  personality.  Whenever 
he  came  to  Princeton,  the  families  of  those  professors 
competed  for  the  pleasure  of  entertaining  him.  He  was 
frequently  asked  to  contribute  articles  for  the  Princeton 
Rez'iezv.  He  was  invited  to  "take  part  in  a  series  of 
sermons  to  be  preached  to  the  students  by  eminent  clergy- 
men" between  September,  1874,  and  April,  1875,  in  the 
College  Chapel  and  in  the  First   Presbyterian   Church. 


320  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIL 

"Any  sermon  that  suits  poor  sinners  will  suit  us 
exactly," — added  Dr.  Hodge  to  this  invitation. 

When  the  American  Oriental  Society,  of  which  Dr. 
Krauth  had  been  elected  a  member  in  Boston,  May  21, 
1862,  met  at  Princeton  in  the  fall  of  that  year,  Dr.  W. 
Henry  Green  urged  him  to  attend,  and  to  favor  it  with 
a  paper  on  "The  internal  History  of  the  authorized  Eng- 
lish Version  of  the  Scriptures,''  a  subject,  writes  Dr. 
Green,  "in  which  you  are  deeply  interested,  and  upon 
which  you  have  probably  bestowed  more  thought  and 
study  than  any  man  in  the  country." 

In  October,  1869,  Dr.  Green  addressed  a  note  to  Mr. 
Lenox  in  New  York,  stating  that  Dr.  Krauth  wished 
to  see  his  collection  of  Bibles,  with  a  view  to  the  prosecu- 
tion of  his  researches  into  the  history  and  constitution 
of  the  English  versions,  and  offered  his  further  services 
to  Dr.  Krauth  in  this  direction.  A  few  weeks  later  he 
writes :  "I  hope  that  you  were  able  to  call  on  Mr.  Lenox 
at  the  time  suggested,  and  found  your  visit  to  his  library 
satisfactory.  ...  I  requested  Dr.  Schaff  to  insert  a 
paragraph  in  the  preface  to  that  volume  of  Lange  upon 
which  I  was  engaged  (The  Song  of  Solomon)  expressive 
of  my  acknowledgements  to  you  for  your  kind  assist- 
ance. He  did  so,  and  it  appeared  in  the  proof;  but  he 
subsequently  thought  best  to  erase  it,  as  nothing  similar 
was  desired  by  either  of  the  other  contributors  to  this 
volume.  I  accordingly  avail  myself  of  this  opportunity 
to  thank  you  renewedly  in  private,  and  to  explain  why  a 
more  public  acknowledgment  is  not  made  as  I  intended 
and  desired." 

Dr.  Krauth's  own  impressions  of  Princeton  are 
described  in  a  note  to  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary 
(November  6,  1862)  : 

We  were  there  but  one  full  day,  but  we  made  good  use 
of  our  time.      In  the  house  of   Professor   Green,   sur- 


i862.]  A  DAY  IN  PRINCETON.  ^21 

rounded  with  all  that  a  refined  hospitality  could  suggest-; 
in  the  library  of  the  Theological  Seminary,  in  the  lecture 
room  of  our  host;  in  the  hurried  yet  pleasant  interviews 
with  Dr.  Hodge  and  Professor  Moffat  in  their  homes ; 
in  wandering  around  under  the  fine  old  trees ;  in  listen- 
ing to  the  learned  dissertations  read  before  the  Oriental 
Society  in  the  library  of  old  Nassau  Hall,  and  to  the 
frank  discussions  which  followed  them;  in  mingling  in 
the  evening  with  the  large  circle  of  cultivated  and  de- 
lightful people  who  met  at  Professor  Green's;  in  these 
and  in  other  pleasant  things,  which  seem  to  us  now  as  if 
they  could  not  be  crowded  into  a  few  hours,  we  spent  a 
day  which  will  forever  hold  its  place  among  the  happiest 
days  of  our  life.  We  can  understand  now  the  idolatry 
of  affection  with  which  the  students  from  Princeton 
look  back  to  it.     It  is  a  social  and  literary  Paradise. 

There  was  no  end,  through  all  those  years,  of  sug- 
gestions and  solicitations  of  work,  for  Dr.  Krauth's 
fertile  pen.  Dr.  B.  M.  Schmucker  from  time  to  time 
reminded  his  friend  of  his  early  intention  to  translate- 
Melanchthon's  Loci  Communes  into  English.  The  Rev. 
Fr.  Wyneken  in  Cleveland,  one  of  the  fathers  of  the 
Missouri  Synod,  urged  him  to  bring  out  Chemnitz' 
Examen  Concilii  Tridentini  in  the  language  of  the  coun- 
try, as  the  only  scholarly  and  scientific  antidote  to  Romish 
aggressiveness.  Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs  would  have  liked  him 
to  write  a  historical  introduction  to  the  new  English 
edition  of  the  Book  of  Concord,  as  he  knew  him  to  be 
actually  engaged  in  preparing  a  history  of  the  Formula 
of  Concord.  Dr.  Phil.  Schaff  solicited  his  co-operation 
in  the  Anglo-American  edition  of  Lange's  Biblework, 
offering  him  the  translation  of  Lange's  Commentary  on 
Genesis,  "Which  takes  the  lead  of  the  Old  Testament 
part  of  this  Opus  Magnum.  You  can  in  this  way  make 
your  labors  spent  on  Delitzsch  available  for  the  benefit  of 
the  theological  public,  with  far  better  prospect  of  success 


322  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

than  by  a  separate  publication  of  Delitzsch  in  English." 
When  the  time  for  the  meeting  of  the  Evangelical 
Alliance  in  New  York  approached,  in  1873,  Dr.  Schaff 
hoped  to  secure  the  services  of  his  friend  by  the  follow- 
ing letter: 

On  Board  the  "Algeria,"  September  24,  1873. 
Will  you  prepare  a  brief  address  on  the  "Genius  of  the 
Reformation,"  or  on  the  "Supremacy  of  the  Bible,"  or 
on  "Bible  versus  Tradition,"  in  view  of  the  Vatican 
decrees.  ...  I  know  you  have  no  sympathy  with  the 
Alliance,  but  this  General  Conference  is  an  immense 
international  and  interdenominational  Christian  (not 
ecclesiastical)  meeting,  and  will  not  compromise  your 
confessional  conscience  in  the  least.  I  am  quite  anxious 
to  have  you  associated  with  it,  both  for  your  sake 
and  for  the  Lutheran  Church,  especially  since  Dr. 
Schmucker's  death.  Please  answer  Yes  immediately. 
In  haste.  P.   S. 

The  final  outcome  of  this  correspondence  was  Dr. 
Krauth's  paper  on  "The  Strength  and  Weakness  of 
Idealism,"  read  before  the  Evangelical  Alliance  in  New 
York,  October  6,  1873. 

In  August,  1878,  the  Rev.  Reuben  Hill  came  forward 
with  a  generous  offer  to  undertake  the  establishment  of 
a  Lutheran  Review,  Dr.  Krauth  to  be  the  Editor,  in  which 
case  Mr.  Hill  would  superintend  the  business  department, 
and  run  the  financial  risks  if  no  one  else  could  be  found 
who  would  be  willing  to  do  so. 

Dr.  Krauth  responded  to  these  propositions  (August 
23,  1878)  as  follows: 

I. — I  think  the  wants  of  our  Church  require  very  im- 
peratively a  theological  Review  or  its  equivalent,  taking 
the  general  position  of  the  General  Council  so  far  as  that 
position  is  established,  and  encouraging  thorough  discus- 
sion, looking  to  its  establishment  in  points  yet  unsettled. 


1878.]  A  LL'THERAX  REVIEW  PROPOSED.  323 

I  have  felt  this  so  deeply  that  I  have  for  years  been  talk- 
ing about  a  "Bibliothek"  in  which  I  desig-ned  to  attempt 
doing  what  I  could,  to  supply  the  want  which  seemed  so 
urgent.   .   .  . 

2. — You  know  the  pressure  of  my  duties  in  the  two 
institutions  and  of  outside  cares.  You  perhaps  do  not 
know  that,  to  eke  out  an  insufficient  income,  I  do  no  little 
literary  labor*  outside  of  my  direct  work,  and  that  it  pays 
me  very  handsomely,  and  is  the  chief  source  from  which 
I  replenish  my  library.  I  try  to  make  my  pen  pay  for 
my  books.  On  the  other  hand  I  believe,  that  I  might 
bring  to  the  position  of  Editor  some  special  advantages. 
I  love  the  sort  of  work  it  involves.  I  have  much  material 
and  am  constantly  producing  more.  I  would  gather 
around  me  a  corps  of  valuable  co-workers.  I  have  some 
good  plans  in  connection  with  such  a  work,  which  would 
be  original  and  attractive.  Who  would  publish  ?  Where 
would  the  Review  be  printed? 

3- — If  I  took  the  Editorship  of  the  Review  I  would  at 
first  consider  it  best  that  I  should  take  it  alone,  t  I 
could  do  more  perfectly  and  with  less  expenditure  of 
time  what  I  would  think  necessary,  than  if  I  had  some 
one  whom  I  was  bound  to  consult.  Divided  responsi- 
bility is  a  great  source  of  weakness.  ...  I  believe  that 
with  a  vigorous  publisher  the  Reviezv  might  be  made  a 
success  financially,  in  that  moderate  way  which  belongs 
to  such  undertakings. 

But  if  it  be  granted  that  a  Reviezv  is  needed,  and  that 
I  think  is  certain,  it  is  still  an  open  question  whether  I 
am  the  right  person  to  undertake  it.  Could  you  not  find 
some  one  whose  time  is  less  absorbed,  whose  personal 
popularity  would  aid  the  work,  and  who  has  not  drawn 
forth  the  opposition  which  some  of  my  views  have 
elicited?   I  do  not  seek  the  position,  and  if  in  the  judg- 

*Referringtohis  work  on  Johnson's  Encyclopaedia,  of  which  he 
was  Associate  Editor,  and  his  contributions  to  Appleton's  Encyclo- 
paedia and  Potter's  Bible  Encyclopsedia. 

t  Mr.  Hill  had  put  the  question  under  this  point :  Would  you  be 
willing  to  share  the  labor  of  such  work  equally  witii  Dr.  Seiss? 


324  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XVU. 

ment  of  Brethren  some  one  else  should  take  the  headship 
of  the  Reviezv,  if  one  be  established,  he  will  find  in  me, 
if  he  desires  it,  one  of  his  heartiest  co-operators. 

When  the  Lutheran  Church  Review  was  finally  estab- 
lished by  the  Alumni  Association  of  the  Theological 
Seminary,  in  1882,  Dr.  Krauth  was  appointed  Editor-in- 
Chief. 

A   CHRONICLE  OF  THE  AUGSBURG   CONFESSION. 

Quite  different  from  the  tone  in  which  the  contro- 
versy with  Dr.  Chas.  Hodge  had  been  conducted,  was 
the  battle  waged  by  Dr.  Krauth  against  Dr.  Jas.  Allen 
Brown  on  a  comparatively  small  question  of  chronology 
in  the  history  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  which  cul- 
minated in  the  publication  of  "A  Chronicle  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession."*  Here,  for  once,  the  diagnosis  of  the 
phrenologist,  who  found  in  Dr.  Krauth  the  "bump  of 
combativeness  without  destructiveness,"  might  have 
seemed  to  be  no  longer  applicable.  For  in  this  case  Dr. 
Krauth  treated  his  antagonist  with  unsparing  severity, 
and  with  a  grim  determination  not  only  to  expose  his 
"fictions  and  blunders"  as  a  historian,  logician  and  theo- 
logian, but  to  attack  his  very  character  as  a  man.  Never 
in  his  life  do  we  find  Dr.  Krauth  so  utterly  out  of  patience 
with  his  opponent,  and  so  relentlessly  bent  on  demolishing 
him.  The  completeness  of  our  narrative  requires  at  least 
a  brief  notice  of  the  occasion  and  the  subject  of  this  con- 
troversy. In  the  fall  of  1877  Drs.  J.  G.  Morris  and  J. 
A.  Seiss  arranged  a  free  conference  of  Lutherans,  the 
First  Free  Diet,  "to  discuss  living  subjects  of  general 
worth  and  importance."  It  was  held  December  27  and 
28,   1877,  in  St.   Matthew's  Church,  Broad  and  Mount 

*  Lutheran  Monographs.  A  Chronicle  of  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion by  Charles  P.  Krauth,  D.D.,  I.L.D.  A  question  of  Latinity,  by 
Henry  E.  Jacobs.  D.D.,  Philadelphia,  J.  Fred.  Smith,  1878. 


i877-]  THE  FIRST  FREE  DIET.  325 

Vernon  St..  Philadelphia,  and  was  attended  by  some  120 
pastors  and  students,  and  about  50  laymen  of  the  Luth- 
eran Church.  Thirteen  papers  were  read  and  discussed, 
eight  of  which  were  prepared  by  members  of  the  General 
Synod,  and  five  by  men  of  the  General  Council.  It  was 
just  ten  years  since  the  disruption  at  Fort  Wayne  and 
the  organization  of  the  General  Council,  and  here  for 
the  first  time  the  leaders  of  the  two  hostile  camps  met 
again  face  to  face  for  personal  conference.  While  the 
debates  throughout  were  certainly  conducted  in  a  spirit 
of  courtesy  and  charity,  it  was  hardly  to  be  expected  that 
all  traces  of  former  irritation  and  friction  should  have 
completely  disappeared.  There  were  repeated  clashes 
between  some  of  the  leaders.  When  Dr.  Krauth  had 
read  his  paper  on  "The  Relation  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
to  the  Denominations  around  us" — as  Dr.  Morris  himself 
had  formulated  his  theme  in  a  letter  of  August  31st — 
Dr.  Brown  at  once  assaulted  him  with  the  charge  that 
he  had  departed  from  the  theme  "as  originally  published," 
and  had  changed  it  on  his  own  authority.  Later  on.  Dr. 
F.  W.  Conrad's  paper  on  the  "Characteristics  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession"  became  the  immediate  occasion 
for  a  question  of  chronology,  whether  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession had  been  sent  to  Luther  a  third  time,  between 
May  226.  and  June  25th,  for  his  final  approval.  Dr. 
Brown  denied  this  and  challenged  Dr.  Krauth  to  prove 
it,  taking  quite  undue  advantage  of  a  typographical 
erratum  in  the  Conservative  Reformation,*  which  any 
intelligent  and  fair-minded  reader  will  at  once  discover 
as  such,  by  a  comparison  with  page  239,  where  the  correct 
date  is  given.  The  question  was,  indeed,  a  very  small 
one  in  itself,  but  of  considerable  importance  to  Dr. 
Krauth,  as  he  had  taken  special  pains  in  the  Conservative 
Reformation  to  prove  that  the  Confession  in  its  final 

*  See  page  234,  June  3d,  which  ought  to  read  July  3d. 


326  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVll. 

shape  had  been  submitted  to  Luther  and  had  received  his 
approval,  over  against  Rueckert  and  other  Rationahsts 
and  Unionists,  vv^ho  contended  that  Luther  was  purposely 
kept  from  active  participation  in  the  Confession,  inas- 
much as  it  had  been  intended  to  be  more  or  less  of  a 
compromise  with  Rome!  But,  after  all,  this  controversy 
in  which  Dr.  Krauth  put  on  his  full  armor  to  crush  his 
antagonist,  reminds  us  strongly  of  Moltke's  saying,  that 
we  must  not  shoot  pheasants  with  heavy  artillery. 

When  shortly  after  this  controversy  Dr.  J.  A.  Brown 
was  stricken  with  severe  affliction,  Dr.  Krauth's  heart 
went  out  in  kindliest  sympathy  for  him.  He  writes  to 
Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs  (January  3,  1880)  :  "Poor  Dr.  Brown! 
We  all  feel  very  sad  in  thinking  of  the  awful  calamity, — 
in  some  sense  worse  than  death, — which  has  fallen  upon 
him.  I  hope  he  may  be  restored,  and  that  his  later  days 
may  be  days  of  peace."  And  again  (April  10,  1880)  : 
"Poor  Dr.  Brown!  How  completely  his  calamity  softened 
the  hearts  of  those  to  whom  he  had  been  most  unkind! 
I  hear  with  great  pleasure  of  everything  which  looks 
hopeful  in  regard  to  his  recovery,  and  I  have  a  conviction 
that,  if  he  is  ever  able  to  resume  labor,  he  will  repair 
some  of  the  mistakes  he  has  made."  Dr.  Brown  died 
June  19,  1882. 

THE  PREDESTINATION   CONTROVERSY. 

On  the  great  Predestination  Controversy  which  led  to 
a  rupture  in  the  Sy nodical  Conference  in  the  year  1880, 
Dr.  Krauth  did  not  publish  anything  during  his  lifetime, 
however  anxious  the  two  contending  parties,  who  charged 
each  other  with  Calvinism  on  the  one  hand  and  with 
Synergism  on  the  other,  were  for  an  opinion  from  one 
who  was  so  well  qualified  to  be  an  impartial  judge. 

In  a  letter  (February  13,  1880,)  to  the  Rev.  A. 
Pflueger,  of  Thornville,  O.,  a  member  of  the  Joint  Synod 


i88o.]  THE  DOCTRI.XE   OF   ELECTION.  327 

of    Ohio,    he    refers    to    the    matter    in    the    following 
language : 

I  have  not  read  Dr.  Walther's  exposition  of  the  doc- 
trine of  election,  but  I  purpose,  as  soon  as  I  can  command 
leisure,  to  write  something  whose  object  shall  be  to  show 
that  the  New  Testament  doctrine,  confessed  by  our 
Church,  in  regard  to  election,  as  fully  as  the  most  ex- 
treme Calvinism,  gives  all  the  glory  to  God  and  ascribes 
to  Him  the  total  merit  of  our  salvation,  both  as  secured 
and  applied,  and  yet  clearly  and  properly  makes  man 
responsible  for  his  own  destruction.  When  that  time 
comes  I  shall  hope  to  study  what  Dr.  Walther  has  written. 

I  think  the  appearance  of  "Altes  und  Neues"*  a  matter 
of  doubtful  expediency,  and  as  to  Dr.  Walther's  Crypto- 
Calvinism,  which,  in  its  historical  sense  would  mean  a 
conscious  Calvinism  furtively  evading  responsibility,  I 
am  sure  this  charge  is  groundless.  That  still  renders  it 
possible  that  there  has  been  an  unconscious  approxima- 
tion to  Calvinism.  Luther  is  constantly  claimed  by  the 
Calvinists  and  I  have  known  intelligent  Calvinists  .  .  . 
who  are  entirely  satisfied  with  the  Formula  of  Concord 
on  the  ''Five  Points."  Yet,  the  claim  and  the  satisfaction 
are  both  groundless.  The  truth  in  the  Formula  so  strictly 
follows  the  line  of  Scripture  thinking,  that  it  is  hard  to 
get  a  spear's  point  under  the  scales  of  its  armor.  My 
own  conviction  about  Luther  is,  that  he  was  never  a  Cal- 
vinist  on  the  "Five  Points,"  but  Augustinian  with  some 
aspects  of  coincidence  and  many  of  divergence,  even 
where  he  was  nearest  Calvinism. 

On  the  last  Sunday  in  October,  1882,  when  Dr.  Krauth 
was,  for  the  last  time,  a  guest  at  the  table  of  his  son-in- 
law,  the  conversation  turned  on  the  lamentable  contro- 
versy concerning  the  doctrine  of  election.  We  urged  him 
to  write  out  his  views  on  the  subject  and  to  give  them  to 
the  Church,  inasmuch  as  many  were  looking  to  him  for 

*  A  periodical  published  by  the  opponents  of  Dr.  Walther. 


328  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIL 

counsel  and  instruction  in  this  complicated  matter.  He 
said  he  knew  it  was  his  duty  to  speak  and  he  would  try 
to  do  so,  if  the  state  of  his  health  would  permit.  After 
his  death  we  found  among  his  papers  the  following 
article,  written  in  a  trembling  hand,  and  evidently  of  a 
fragmentary  character.  It  was  his  intention  to  add  a 
number  of  points  which  were  to  show  what  language  on 
the  disputed  question  was  Calvinistic,  and  what  was  not. 
Under  the  form  of  a  review  of  a  little  tract  of  Dr. 
Walther  he  says: 

The  time  is  well  spent  in  any  discussion  which  is  de- 
voted to  clearly  settling,  what  is  the  question?  If  the 
disputants  in  the  Synodical  Conference  agree  upon  a 
statement,  made  in  simple  good  faith,  as  to  what  are  the 
points  on  which  they  are  one,  and  what  are  the  points  on 
which  they  differ — we  may  hope  for  final  peace.  Till 
they  can  do  this,  the  more  they  discuss  the  doctrine  of 
election  the  more  they  will  muddle  the  mind  of  the 
Church,  and  the  further  they  will  be  from  a  decision. 

The  question.  Is  our  faith  a  cause  of  God's  election  or 
an  effect  of  it?  must  be  carefully  defined  before  men  can 
wisely  take  sides  upon  it.  Considered  as  a  question  of 
the  relation  between  man  and  God,  the  answer  would  be 
made  in  one  way.  Considered  as  a  question  covering  the 
case  between  one  man  and  another,  the  answer  would  be 
reversed. 

What  is  the  cause  of  my  faith?  The  generic  action 
of  God's  election  or  choice.  He  chose  to  provide  redemp- 
tion for  lost  man.  He  chose  that  a  divine-human  Saviour 
should  consummate  it.  He  chose  that  the  Spirit  should 
apply  it.  He  chose  the  Word  and  Sacraments  as  organic 
instruments  of  it,  and  these  links  of  choices  form  the 
generic  chain  of  election.  This  election  is  the  cause  of 
faith.  Without  it  there  would  be  no  object  of  faith,  no 
vocation  to  it,  no  overcoming  by  grace  of  natural  in- 
ability. From  this  point  of  view,  "Predestination,  or  the 
eternal  election  of  God  pertains  only  to  the  good  and 


i882.]  THE   DOCTRIXE   OF   ELECTION.  329 

beloved  children  of  God  and  is  the  cause  of  their  salva- 
tion." (Formula  of  Concord).  It  is  very  clear,  too, 
why  this  predestination  of  God  is  in  such  sense  the  foun- 
dation of  our  salvation,  "that  nothing  but  the  triumph  of 
the  gates  of  hell  could  overthrow  it."  For  if  "this  pre- 
destination" is  overthrown,  we  have  no  elected  salvation, 
no  elected  Saviour,  no  elected  work  of  the  Spirit,  no 
elected  means  of  grace — all  are  gone.  And  the  bare 
possibility  of  faith  goes  with  them.  And  from  this  point 
of  view  is  manifest  why  it  is  so  great  and  obvious  an 
Error  "that  not  alone  God's  pity  and  the  most  sacred 
merit  of  Christ,  is  the  Cause  of  the  divine  election  of 
God,  but  that  there  is  also  something  in  us  which  is  a 
Cause  of  the  divine  election,  for  the  sake  of  which  Cause 
God  has  chosen  us  to  eternal  life."  Our  faith  is  the  out- 
come and  practical  finality  of  this  election — an  effect  in 
which  the  cause  comes  to  its  consummation. 

Now  comes  the  other  question,  no  longer  as  between 
man  and  God,  but  as  between  man  and  man.  Election  as 
generic  contemplates  all  men  alike — its  redemption  is 
universal ;  its  Saviour,  the  Saviour  of  all ;  its  Spirit  the 
gift  purchased  for  all ;  its  means  are  objective  forces, 
whicli  put  all  men  to  whom  they  come  on  a  common  plane 
of  responsibility,  and  above  the  simple  condition  of 
natural  helplessness.  Why  do  men  in  completely  parallel 
relations  to  this  election  move  in  opposite  directions? 
The  one  believes,  the  other  disbelieves.  Is  the  election 
of  God  in  any  sense  the  cause  of  the  difference?  The 
answer  of  the  Calvinist  is :  Yes.  The  answer  of  the 
Lutheran  is :  No.  The  election  of  God  is  indeed  the  cause 
of  the  faith  of  the  one.  but  it  is  neither  positively  nor 
negatively,  neither  by  act  nor  by  failure  to  act,  the  cause 
of  the  unbelief  of  the  other.  Hence  it  is  not  the  cause 
of  the  difference.  I  choose  (or  elect)  to  offer  bread  to 
two  beggars.  The  election  of  bread  for  his  food  and 
the  election  to  offer  it  to  him  are  the  proper  cause  of  the 
reception  of  the  bread  on  the  part  of  the  one,  but  they 
are  not  the  cause  of  the  rejection  on  the  part  of  the  other. 
The  first  concurs  in  mv  election,  but  his  concurrence  is 


330  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

the  effect,  not  the  cause,  of  my  election.  The  second 
refuses,  but  his  refusal  is  not  the  effect  of  my  election, 
but  an  effect  in  spite  of  it.  As  between  me  and  the  men 
the  decision  must  be,  that  the  acceptance  of  one  is  no 
more  than  the  refusal  of  the  other,  the  cause  of  my  elec- 
tion. But  between  the  one  and  the  other  the  difference  is 
made  by  the  willingness  to  receive — wrought  by  me 
through  the  oft'er — and  the  unwillingness  to  receive, 
wrought  by  the  man  himself  in  spite  of  the  offer. 

Faith  is  not  the  cause  of  our  general  election.  That 
must  be  admitted  by  all.  (But  neither  can  it  be  the  cause 
of  our  particular  election,  for  the  particular  is  only  pos- 
sible, and  indeed  only  thinkable,  as  the  result  of  the 
general.)  But  it  is  the  cause  of  the  difference  between 
the  man  who  receives  the  benefits  of  this  (the?)  election, 
and  the  man  who  refuses  them.  This  faith  is  foreseen 
indeed,  but  it  does  not  become  by  that  the  cause  of  the 
election — it  is  foreseen  as  an  effect  of  the  election  and 
therefore  cannot  be  considered  as  the  cause,  it  is  a  finality 
in  the  work  of  God  in  the  restoration  of  fellowship.  It 
is,  as  a  condition,  part  of  the  election,  and  cannot  there- 
fore be  the  cause  of  the  whole. 

There  is  a  noticeable  difference  between  our  Lutheran 
divines  in  the  sixteenth  century  and  those  of  later  date, 
but  we  do  not  believe  there  is  a  conflict.  In  the  sixteenth 
century  the  struggle  was  for  the  true  doctrine  of  election. 
As  the  warfare  with  Calvinism  grew  hotter  there  was  a 
fierce  conflict  with  the  error  of  reprobation.  Luther  and 
our  earlier  divines  over  against  the  Pelagianism  of  Rome, 
made  most  prominent  election  as  it  is  related  to  the  grace 
of  God — and  in  this  relation  it  is  the  cause  of  faith — the 
faith  is  conditioned  by  the  election  of  God  as  its  necessary 
pre-supposition. 

The  later  divines  over  against  the  absolutism  of  Cal- 
vinism brought  into  prominence  election  as  it  is  related  to 
the  responsibility  of  man.  In  this  relation,  election  is 
not  the  cause  of  the  difference  in  result,  for  while  faith 
is  the  result  of  it  in  the  believer,  want  of  faith  is  not  the 
result  of  it  in  the  unbeliever. 


1870-83.]  BIBLE  REVISION  COMMITTEE.  331 

Faith  is  the  actual  condition  of  the  appHcation  of  elec- 
tion or  its  determination  at  this  point. 

No  doubt  there  are  expressions  in  both  directions 
which,  if  isolated,  are  open  to  objection  and  incapable  of 
harmony.  The  Formula  of  Concord  is  midway  between 
the  tendencies,  and  avoids  the  extremes  of  both.  {The 
Lutheran  Church  Review.     Vol.  II.,  pp.  68-71.) 

WORK   ON   THE    BIBLE   REVISION. 

The  Convocation  of  Canterbury,  "the  cradle  of  Anglo- 
Saxon  Christendom,"  on  May  6,  1870,  appointed  a  Com- 
mittee of  eminent  Biblical  scholars  and  digiiitaries  of  the 
Church  of  England,  to  revise,  for  pul)lic  use,  the  author- 
ized English  version  of  161 1,  and  to  associate  with  them 
representative  Bible  scholars  of  other  Christian  denom- 
inations using  this  version.  The  American  Committee 
of  Revision  was  organized  in  1871,  by  invitation  of  the 
English  Revisers,  and  began  active  work  in  1872.  Its 
chairman.  Dr.  Philip  Schaff,  invited  Dr.  Krauth  in  1871 
to  join  the  Committee,  as  a  member  of  the  Old  Testament 
Revision  Company.  He  promptly  accepted  the  appoint- 
ment for  which  he  was  so  well  qualified,  not  only  on 
account  of  his  "rare  biblical  and  general  learning,"  as 
"the  most  scholarly  representative  of  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church,"  but  particularly  in  view  of  his  ex- 
tensive studies  on  the  history  of  the  early  English 
versions,  whose  results  he  had  published  in  a  series  of 
articles  on  Bible  Revision  and  History  of  the  Authorized 
Version,  in  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  February  6  to 
June  20,  1862. 

How  greatly  his  person  and  work  were  appreciated  by 
his  colleagues  in  the  American  Revision  Company,  is 
shown  by  the  tribute  placed  upon  their  records  at  the 
time  of  his  death,  written  by  Dr.  Phil.  Schaff.  It  ends 
with  these  words : 


332  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

In  his  theological  views  Dr.  C.  P.  Krauth  was  a  Luth- 
eran of  Lutherans,  being  a  zealous  defender  and  main- 
tainer  of  the  Augustana,  pure  and  simple,  and  he  headed 
the  reaction  which  has  been  going  on  for  a  generation 
in  our  country,  against  the  influences  which  were  thought 
to  assail  the  integrity  or  the  authority  of  the  venerable 
Confession  of  Augsburg.  But  while  he  strove  with  all 
his  might  for  the  preservation  of  Lutheran  doctrine  and 
order,  he  cherished  a  catholic  spirit  and  took  a  cordial 
interest  in  the  prosperity  of  all  evangelical  Christians. 
He  became  a  member  of  this  body  from  the  commence- 
ment, and,  although  hindered,  sometimes  by  professional 
engagements,  at  others  by  the  state  of  his  health,  from 
being  as  regular  in  attendance  as  was  desirable,  his 
presence  was  always  an  advantage,  and  his  large 
acquaintance  with  the  early  English  versions  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  with  the  best  idioms  of  our  tongue,  made 
his  suggestions  often  of  very  great  value  in  the  settle- 
ment of  a  disputed  issue.  Li  personal  intercourse  he 
was  one  of  the  most  delightful  of  companions,  genial, 
courteous,  full  of  resources,  sparkling  with  wit  and 
anecdote,  yet  always  preserving  the  elevated  tone  of  a 
Christian  gentleman.  .  .  .  Our  country  has  produced 
few  men  who  united  in  their  own  persons  so  many  of 
the  excellencies  which  distinguish  the  scholar,  the  theo- 
logian, the  exegete,  the  debater  and  the  leader  of  his 
brethren,  as  did  our  accomplished  associate.  His  learn- 
ing did  not  smother  his  genius,  nor  did  his  philosophical 
attainments  impair  the  simplicity  of  his  faith.  All  gifts 
and  all  acquisitions  were  sedulously  made  subservient  to 
the  Gospel  of  Christ.  He  illustrated  his  teachings  by  his 
life,  and  has  left  behind  him  a  memory  precious  and 
fragrant  not  only  in  his  own  large  communion,  but  to 
multitudes  beyond  its  pale. 

In  the  ''Anglo-American  Bible  Revision  by  members 
of  the  American  Revision  Committee,  printed  for  private 
circulation,"  (New  York,  1879,)  Dr.  Krauth  published 
an  article  on  the   "Older  Eng-lish  and   the   Authorized 


,879.]  T^/ZE  AUTHORIZED  VERSION.  333 

Versions,"  probably  the  substance  of  the  paper  read 
before  the  American  Oriental  Society  at  Princeton,  by 
request  of  Dr.  W.  H.  Green.  (See  page  320.)  The  con- 
cluding paragraph  pays  this  glowing  tribute  to  the 

EXCELLENCE  OF   KING  JAMES's   VERSION. 

The  Bible  of   161 1  encountered  prejudices  and  over- 
came them;  it  had  rivals  great  in  just  claims  and  strong 
in  possession,  and  it  displaced  them ;  it  moved  slowly  that 
it  might  move  surely ;  the  Church  of  England  lost  many 
of  her  children,  but  they  all  took  their  mother's  Bible 
with  them,  and  taking  that,  they  were  not  wholly  lost  to 
her.     It  more  and  more  melted  indifference  into  cordial 
admiration,    secured    the    enthusiastic    approval    of    the 
cautious  scholar,  and  won  the  artless  love  of  the  people. 
It  has  kindled  into  fervent  praise  men  who  were  cold  on 
every    other    theme.      It    glorified    the    tongue    of    the 
worshipper   in  glorifying  God,   and  by  the   inspiration 
indwelling  in   it,   and  the   inspiration   it   has   imparted, 
has  created  English  literature.    Its  most  brilliant  eulogies 
have  come   from  those  who,   hating  Protestantism,  yet 
acknowledged  the  grandeur  of  this  book,  which  lives  by 
that    Protestantism   of   which    it   is   the   offspring,   that 
Protestantism  to  which,  world-wide,  it  gives  life  as  one 
of  its  roots.     When,  to  him  who  has  been  caught  in  the 
snare  of  unbelief,  or  drawn  by  the  lure  of  false  belief, 
every  other  chord  of  the  old  music  wakes  only  repug- 
nant memories,  its  words  have  stolen  in,  too  strong  to  be 
beaten  back,  too  sweet  to  be  renounced,  once  more  the 
thunder  of  God's  power,  the  pulsation  of  God's  heart. 
Its  faults  have  been  hardly  more  than  the  foils  of  its 
beauties.     It  has  so  interwoven,  by  the  artistic  delicacy 
even  of  its  mechanical  transfers,  the  very  idioms  charac- 
teristic of  the  sacred  tongues,  that  Hebraisms  and  Hellen- 
isms need  no  comment  to  the  English  mind,  but  come 
as  part  of  its  simplest,  its  noblest,  its  deepest  thought  and 
emotion.     Its  words  are  nearer  to  men  than  their  own, 
and  it  gives  articulation  to  groanings  which  but  for  it 


334  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIL 

could  not  be  uttered.  It  has  lifted  the  living  world  to 
the  solemn  fixedness  of  those  old  heavenly  thoughts  and 
feelings,  instead  of  dragging  them  by  low,  secular  phrase 
out  of  their  high  and  holy  thrones,  down  to  the  dust  of 
the  shifting  present,  or  leaving  them  dim  and  dreary  be- 
hind the  fog  of  pedantry.  It  has  fought  against  the 
relentless  tendency  of  time  to  change  language,  and  has 
won  all  the  great  fields ;  words  have  dropped  away  or 
have  deserted  their  meaning,  as  soldiers  are  lost  even  by 
the  side  which  conquers ;  but  the  great  body  of  the  army 
of  its  ancient  but  not  antiquated  forms,  among  the  sweet- 
est and  the  highest  speech  beneath  the  voices  of  the  upper 
world,  remains  intact  and  victorious.  The  swords  of  its 
armory  may  have  gathered  here  and  there  a  spot  of  rust, 
but  their  double  edge  has  lost  none  of  its  keenness,  and 
their  broad  surface  little  of  its  refulgence.  It  has  made 
a  new  translation,  as  against  something  old  and  fading, 
impossible,  for  it  is  itself  new,  more  fresh,  more  vital, 
more  youthful  than  anything  which  has  sought  to  sup- 
plant it.  We  need,  and  may  have,  a  revision  of  it.  It- 
self a  revision  of  revisions,  its  own  wonderful  growth 
reveals  the  secret  of  the  approach  to  perfection.  But  by 
very  virtue  of  its  grandly  closing  one  era  of  struggle  it 
opened  another,  for  in  human  efforts  all  great  endings 
are  but  great  beginnings.  A  revision  we  may  have,  but 
a  substitute,  not  now — it  may  be  never.  The  accidents, 
of  our  Authorized  Version  are  open  to  change,  but  its 
substantial  part  is  beyond  it,  until  the  English  takes 
its  place  among  the  tongues  that  shall  cease.  The  new 
revision  will  need  little  new  English.  Its  best  work  will 
be  to  reduce  the  old  English  of  the  old  version,  to  more 
perfect  consistency  with  the  text  and  with  itself.  That 
version  is  now,  and  unchanged  in  essence  will  be,  per- 
haps to  the  end  of  time,  the  mightiest  bond — intellectual, 
social,  and  religious, — of  that  vast  body  of  nations  which 
girdles  the  earth,  and  spreads  far  toward  the  poles,  the 
nations  to  whom  the  English  is  the  language  of  their 
hearts,  and  the  English  Bible  the  matchless  standard  of 
that  language.     So  long  as  Christianity  remains  to  them 


i88i.]  THE  REVISED   VERSION.  335 

the  light  out  of  God,  the  English  Bible  will  be  cherished 
by  millions,  as  the  dearest  conservator  of  pure  faith,  the 
greatest  power  of  holy  life  in  the  world. 

THE   REVISED  VERSION. 

In  noticing  the  "Comparative  Edition"  of  the  New 
Testament,  published  by  Porter  &  Coates,  Philadelphia, 
Dr.  Krauth  gives  his  judgment  on  the  merits  and 
prospects  of  the  Revised  Version  as  follows : 

The  revision  of  1881  is  in  many  important  respects  a 
great  advance  on  that  of  161 1.  It  presents  a  far  more 
accurate  text,  it  is  far  more  faithful  to  the  grammatical 
and  other  linguistic  niceties  of  the  Greek;  it  is  more 
strictly  consistent  with  the  original  and  with  itself,  than 
the  so-called  Authorized  Version, — the  Authorized  hav- 
ing to  us  no  other  species  of  authority  than  the  new.  As 
a  companion  to  the  received  version  it  is  invaluable.  .  .  . 
Every  New  Testament  student  should  have  it.  Of  all 
this  there  ought  to  be  no  question,  and  among  the  un- 
prejudiced there  is  none.  .  .  .  The  real  and  serious 
question  is  not  whether  the  new  is  good.  It  is  good, 
very  good,  and  in  certain  respects  much  better  than  the 
old.  But  is  it  the  best  work  for  which  we  can  reasonably 
hope?  Nothing  is  faultless,  but  is  this  revision  so  nearly 
the  consummation  of  a  wise  wish,  that  it  would  be 
hazardous  to  decline  it  as  a  finality,  to  insist  upon  another 
effort  tow^ard  perfection  ?  We  are  not  sure  that  it  is.  We 
grant  the  difficulty  connected  with  the  mere  fact  of 
change.  Right  or  wrong,  the  pathos,  the  melody,  the 
associations  with  all  that  is  sweetest  and  most  sacred, 
cling  to  the  old.  Our  childhood  received  its  impressions 
in  its  words,  our  saddest  hours  brightened  in  the  phrase 
of  its  promises ;  terror  and  tenderness  of  Law  and  Gospel 
came  to  us  in  its  interpretations  of  God's  mind.  The 
roots  of  our  soul  are  struck  deep  into  it,  and  our  eternal 
hopes  open  out  into  its  firmament.  Only  in  theory  is  the 
English  Bible  distinguishable,  to  the  mass  of  readers,  from 


336  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chaf.XVU. 

the  very  Bible  itself,  and  what  is  taken  from  it,  seems  to 
them  so  much  stolen  from  the  legacy  of  God.  We  try 
to  allow  for  all  this.  It  is  not  in  us  to  look  as  dis- 
passionately on  the  new,  as  if  we  had  never  known  the 
old.  But  after  all  our  effort  at  allowance,  it  seems  to  us 
that  in  grave  respects  the  new  falls  below  the  conceiv- 
able— and  perhaps  below  the  attainable.  Its  new  elements 
have  not  the  inspiration  of  genius,  which  is  such  a  marked 
and  confessed  feature  of  Luther's,  and  of  the  English 
Revision  of  161 1.  It  bears  traces  of  the  Committee 
room,  and  of  the  conjunction  of  very  unequal  powers, 
and  of  imperfect  affinities,  whose  divergences  were 
adjusted  by  the  votes  of  majorities.  Many  beauties  of 
the  old  vanish  into  the  accuracies  of  the  new — and  if  we 
cannot  have  both,  it  is  better  to  have  accuracy  without 
beauty,  than  beauty  without  accuracy.  But  is  it  not 
possible  to  have  both?  May  not  a  beautiful  accuracy  be 
substituted  for  a  beautiful  inaccuracy?  Painstaking  and 
scholarship  are  manifest  in  the  new,  but  with  them  goes, 
at  times,  a  mechanical  hardness,  suggestive  rather  of  an 
interlinear  than  of  a  translation  in  the  highest  sense — 
thought  for  thought,  and  power  for  power.  You  rarely 
meet  in  it,  what  strikes  you  as  a  felicity.  The  delicacies 
and  niceties  by  which  the  best  English  has  the  power  of 
mirroring  the  beauties  and  subleties  of  a  great  original, 
do  not  always  seem  to  be  in  the  mastery  of  the  Revisers. 
Their  training  seems  to  be  too  purely  theological,  and 
their  style  too  narrowly  that  of  their  books.  They  have 
taken  up  the  ocean  too  much  by  the  spoonful.  They  have 
brought  us  by  their  analyses  to  a  nearer  understanding  of 
the  properties  of  salt  water,  but  the  roar  and  swell  and 
ripple  of  the  sea  are  hushed.  The  work  often  seems  done 
word  for  word,  at  the  expense  of  sentence  for  sentence. 
Each  part  is  right,  and  the  whole  is  wrong.  It  must 
have  been  a  strong  sense  of  the  imperfection  of  the 
English  work,  at  some  points,  which  led  the  American 
Revisers  to  insist  upon  an  appendix  of  insoluble  dissense. 
If  the  revision  of  1881  is  meant  as  a  finality,  the  Amer- 
icans should  not  have  asked  this, — and  the  British  should 


THE  NEW  REVISION  NOT  FINAL. 


337 


not  have  tolerated  it.  But  it  seems  to  us  clear  that  this 
revision,  though  in  the  main  so  good,  cannot  be  accepted 
as  a  finality  precisely  as  it  stands.  After  the  judgment 
of  Christendom  has  been  completely  expressed  upon  it, 
let  it  be  taken  up  again. — let  the  Revisers  on  both  sides 
of  the  Atlantic  have  a  distinct  understanding  as  to  their 
part  in  it,  and  let  the  effort  be  renewed  to  give  to  those 
who  use  the  English  tongue,  a  translation  which  shall, 
beyond  rational  dispute,  be  to  the  nineteenth  century  what 
Luther  was  to  the  German,  and  Tyndale  to  the  English 
of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  our  Authorized  to  the  seven- 
teenth. And  let  it  not  be  forgotten  that  the  Authorized 
was  the  last  of  a  series,  running  through  nearly  a  century. 
It  was  slow  in  displacing  its  predecessors.  Such  authori- 
zation as  was  given  it  amounted  to  little  in  the  struggle. 
It  triumphed  by  its  inner  excellences,  and  the  Version 
which  displaces  it  must  be  great  indeed — so  great  that 
no  amount  of  time  and  effort  needed  to  produce  it  should 
be  considered  excessive.  (June  30,    1881.) 

BOOK    REVIEWS. 

Apart  from  his  scholarly  theological  contributions  to 
the  Lutheran  and  Missionary,  and  for  years  after  he  had 
ceased  to  write  for  the  paper  on  those  graver  subjects, 
Dr.  Krauth  continued  to  have  charge  of  the  "Library," 
as  a  reviewer  of  the  latest  publications.  His  extensive 
reading,  his  familiarity  with  the  best  products  of  English 
literature,  his  exquisite  taste,  his  keenly  critical  eye,  to- 
gether with  his  own  poetical  talent  combined  to  make 
him  particularly  well  fitted  for  such  work.  For  years, 
as  a  member  of  the  Shakespeare  Club  in  Philadelphia, 
he  had  taken  an  active  part  in  the  scholarly  researches 
and  studies  of  that  societv.  His  book  notices  are  throusfh- 
out  characteristic  of  the  man,  not  only  in  their  free  play 
of  wit  and  good-humored  satire,  but  likewise  in  their 
whole-souled  sympathy  with  everything  that  is  truly 
human, — Homo  sum,  nihil  humani  a  mc  alicnum  pnto. 
22 


338  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

Some  of  his  prettiest  and  most  pointed  utterances  are 
contained  in  these  notices ;  as,  for  instance,  when  he  says 
of  a  famous  orator :  "He  has  formed  his  habit  of  think- 
ing to  the  ear,  and  hence  his  productions  are  necessarily- 
diminished  in  their  power  to  the  eye."  Or,  when  he  dis- 
poses of  a  certain  collection  of  biographical  sketches  with 
this  advice  to  the  editor:  "Before  he  puts  a  man's  life 
in,  he  ought  to  make  sure  the  man  had  one." 

We  present,  by  way  of  illustration,  some  extracts, 
showing  first  the  general  animus  and  the  principles  he 
followed  as  a  literary  critic ;  and  then  a  few  specimens  of 
reviews  of  well-known  writers. 

JUST    CRITICISM. 

There  is  nothing  so  much  needed  in  this  country,  in 
the  notices  of  books,  as  a  manly  expression  of  the  honest 
opinion  of  the  reviewer,  and  a  definite  statement  of  what 
he  believes  to  be  their  faults.  Almost  all  our  reviewing 
praises  or  blames  in  the  lump;  pronounces  sentence  or 
acquittal  without  pretending  to  sum  up  the  evidence.  No 
book  should  be  condemned  on  a  general  charge,  nor 
accepted  on  a  commendation  which  specifies  nothing. 

HUMOR  AND  GOOD  HUMOR. 

The  propensity  to  look  at  the  ludicrous  side  of  things 
is  a  very  dangerous  one  sometimes.  If  any  man  suspects 
himself  of  it,  it  would  be  well  for  him  to  be  very 
cautious.  There  is  no  sin  which  will  be  visited  upon  him 
more  remorselessly  by  some  of  his  race. 

The  vice  of  humor  seems  to  be  regarded  by  some  sober 
men  as  the  most  dreadful  to  which  any  man  can  be  ad- 
dicted, and  they  would  account  for  the  fact  that  it  is  not 
forbidden  in  the  Decalogue,  solely  on  the  principle  on 
which  an  old  legislator  omitted  to  attach  a  penalty  to 
parricide, — that  it  was  so  wicked  a  thing  that  he  took 
it  for  granted  nobody  would  commit  it. 

And  yet,  Luther  overruns  with  it,  the  old  Puritans 


i86i-62.]  STEALING  AS  A  FINE  ART.  339 

reveal  it,  heightening  its  zest  by  their  invincible  gravity. 
Some  of  the  most  exquisite  humor  is  found  in  the  "Pil- 
grim's Progress,"  and  the  sacred  writings  themselves, 
not  only  exhibit  the  higher  forms  of  wit,  such  as  irony 
and  sarcasm,  but  there  sometimes  meet  us  even  in  them, 
the  less  grave  turns  of  word  and  thought  in  which  wit 
delights,  and  that  mixture  of  the  sense  of  the  ludicrous, 
with  a  tenderness  of  the  human  creatures  it  involves, 
which  generates  playfulness. 

Let  us  allow  every  man  to  be  himself  in  things  inno- 
cent. Our  race  is  a  rational  reflection  of  the  great 
thoughts  of  God  that  are  seen  in  the  Universe ;  and  where 
so  much  around  us  shows  that  God  meant  it  to  be  glad, 
if  we  will  be  morose,  let  us  not  make  a  virtue  of  our 
severity,  and  if  we  will  not  be  happy  with  the  happy,  let 
us  at  least  not  put  an  embargo  upon  their  smiling. 

(September  6,  1861.) 

PLAGIARISM. 

Plagiarism  is  one  of  the  fine  arts.  It  requires  genius, 
which  devotes  itself  to  its  one  great  mission  of  stealing. 
We  do  not  chronicle  these  masterly  practices  against 
ourselves,  by  way  of  complaint.  Far  from  it.  We  are 
rather  flattered  by  them.  Your  true  master-plagiarist 
only  steals  what  is  worth  stealing.  He  will  not  be  put  off 
with  a  pocket-comb  or  a  pen-knife,  when  he  can  get  hold 
of  a  gold  watch  or  a  well  filled  port-monnaie.  He  is  not 
easily  deluded  into  stealing  counterfeit  notes.  He  in- 
stinctively reads  the  men  who  look  as  if  they  carried  that 
kind.  The  good  taste  which  our  too  ardent  admirers 
show,  therefore,  in  what  they  take,  will  go  far  in  cover- 
ing any  objections  the  scrupulous  might  feel,  as  to  the 
way  in  which  it  is  taken.  Go  on  then,  ye  benefactors  of 
your  readers,  sustained  by  the  consciousness,  that  your 
disinterested  sacrifice  of  yourselves  inures  to  their  good. 
Your  loss  is  their  gain.  .  .  .  After  all,  what  you  steal 
does  not  impoverish  us,  and  makes  you  rich  indeed.  Let 
your  discriminating  enterprise  go  even  further: 


340  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

"  We  like  the  part  you  stole  the  best, 
Take  courage,  friends,  and  steal  the  rest." 

(February  13,  1862.) 

SKELETONS. 

We  once  asked  a  bookseller,  renowned  among  the  sons 
of  Levi  for  his  skill  in  combining  good  wares  with  low 
prices,  "What  class  of  books  is  most  in  demand  among 
clergymen?"  We  are  sorry  to  say  that  his  reply  was, 
"Skeletons!"  "There  is  a  skeleton  in  every  house,"  to 
be  sure;  but  the  clergyman  has  often  too  many  skeletons 
in  his  house :  he  puts  them  there  himself,  and  seems  to 
look  upon  them  without  terror.  And  yet  we  are  not 
going  to  put  the  blame  of  the  whole  thing  on  the  poor 
ministers. 

As  long  as  the  present  inhuman  and  pagan  demands 
which  a  remorseless  Church  makes  upon  ministers  as 
to  the  number  of  services  and  bulk  of  matter  continues, 
so  long  will  books  which  furnish  the  straw  for  this  im- 
moderate brick-making  be  written,  bought  and  used.  The 
sun-baked  bricks  (and  such  are  most  sermons)  require 
something  to  hold  them  together,  and  the  wholesale 
maker  of  them  must  depend  upon  other  hands  to  help 
him  to  furnish  the  "tale."  Many  a  poor  parson  is  so 
stinted  in  his  salary,  that  his  library  contains  very  little 
more  than  a  tattered  hymnbook,  and  a  Bible  whose  small 
print  is  almost  illegible  from  constant  thumbing.  This 
parson,  with  these  very  limited  intellectual  tools,  is 
worked  all  week  like  a  horse  in  a  bark-mill.  He  visits 
more  sick  people  than  many  a  doctor  does,  settles  more 
difficult  questions  of  all  kinds  than  a  judge,  corresponds 
extensively  as  one  who  feels  that  he  must  take  some 
care  of  the  Church  at  large,  receives  visitors  without 
end,  does  his  wife's  shopping,  or  nurses  the  baby  while 
she  goes  out  to  do  it,  and  is  worried  and  overtasked  all 
week.  Saturday  comes,  and  after  Saturday  is  the  in- 
exorable Sunday.  Two  sermons  are  to  be  preached. 
Where  are  they  to  come  from?   Not  from  his  poor  head. 


i86i.l  THE  SKELETON  IK  THE  PARSONAGE. 


341 


Not  from  a  thousand  books,  by  an  exquisite  mosaic-work 
process,  inlaying  solid  theology  with  scores  of  nice  little 
things  from  the  best  modern  poets  and  writers  for  the 
magazines.  He  has  not  the  books  for  this.  No  brother, 
heaven-sent,  comes  along  to  relieve  him.  Nobody,  just 
then,  wishes  to  exchange.  What  i-/za// he  do  ?  "To  steal, 
or  not  to  steal,  that  is  the  question."  Stealing  rises  up 
before  him  in  the  garb  of  a  dire  necessity,  or  apparelled 
almost  like  an  angel  of  virtue.  I  would  rather  starve 
myself,  he  argues,  than  steal ;  but  can  I  allow  an  affection- 
ate people  to  starve?  and  starve  they  must,  if  I  do  not 
steal.  They  care  not  whence  my  matter  comes.  I  will 
steal ;  or  no,  I  will  not  steal.  I  will  fix  what  I  borrozv,  on 
my  memory,  and — extemporize.  My  people  thank 
Heaven  that  their  minister  don't  read  his  sermons.  They 
know  that  there  are  but  two  ways  of  getting  a  sermon: 
one  is  for  the  man  to  write  it,  and  then  it  is  his  own ;  the 
other  is  to  extemporize,  and  then  they  are  sure  it  comes 
from  above. — He  yields  to  the  fatal  attraction  of  Pulpit 
Aids,  laying  to  his  soul  the  flattering  unction  that  he  only 
borrows.  Whatever  may  be  his  doubt  as  to  the  proper 
name  of  the  process  by  which  he  uses  what  is  not  his 
own,  of  one  thing  he  is  assured,  and  that  is.  that  if  he  is 
put  among  the  thieves,  his  congregation  ought  to  go  with 
him,  not  merely  on  the  principle  that  "the  receiver  is  as 
bad  as  the  thief,"  but  yet  more  on  this  ground,  that  they 
drove  him  to  his  evil  courses.  Beyond  all  doubt,  the 
books  which  furnish  aid  for  the  pulpit,  in  the  form  of 
outlines,  are  often  used  to  solve  the  difficulty  raised  by  a 
certain  famous  paradoxical  wish.  They  teach  a  man  to 
swim  without  going  into  the  water,  or,  rather,  they  put 
bladders  under  his  arms,  and  he  can  then  go  in  anywhere 
safely.  If  Providence  has  favored  him  with  a  good,  light, 
natatory  head,  arranged  after  the  style  of  the  bladders, 
and  evidently  made  to  swim,  he  is  sure,  between  the  three, 
not  to  sink.  He  may  rise  to  the  reputation  of  a  great 
sensationalist,  and  be  considered  a  model  swimmer. 

Books  of  this  class  are  very  ancient.     Luther  speaks 
of  a  work  of  the  sort  famous  in  his  day,  known  by  the 


342  CHARLES,  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

title,  "Dormi  Secure,"  Sleep  Soundly.  The  words  of 
the  title  were  supposed  to  be  addressed  to  the  preacher, 
as  much  as  to  say,  Here  everything  is  made  to  your  hand. 
You  need  not  any  more  be  "sleepless  to  give  your  hearers 
sleep."  Put  this  under  your  pillow  and  take  your  nap. 
When  you  are  done,  take  it  from  under  your  pillow,  and 
in  three  minutes  you  will  be  able  to  give  your  people 
their  nap  in  turn.  It  was  a  sort  of  double-edged  anodyne, 
and  no  doubt  greatly  aided  the  slumbers  of  both  priests 
and  people.  A  venerable  pastor  of  our  Church,  contrast- 
ing the  amount  of  attention  now  given  to  homiletics,  with 
the  very  little  which  was  said  about  it  in  his  day,  remarked, 
that  the  whole  course  given  him  in  that  department  by 
his  preceptor,  consisted  in  the  solitary  precept  to  make  a 
skeleton  with  a  very  large  number  of  heads.  The  result 
would  be,  that  by  the  time  he  had  said  a  little  on  each,  his 
sermon  would  reach  the  due  length.  The  Pulpit  Aids 
simplify  the  process  still  further,  furnishing  the  heads 
(unfortunately  not  the  head)  to  hand.  Nevertheless,  a 
plausible  reasoner  might  urge,  that  there  are  men  who 
have  good  inventive  powers,  rich  in  matter,  but  either 
from  defect  of  the  logical  faculty,  or,  from  want  of  train- 
ing, are  unskilful  in  arranging  their  matter.  Such  men, 
he  would  say,  may  take  the  meagre  skeleton,  and  clothe  it 
upon  with  the  muscle  and  fibre  of  their  own  mind,  till 
a  living  sermon  results  from  the  union.  They  treat  an 
outline  from  another  hand  as  Shakespeare  treated  the  old 
plays,  which  he  took  as  mere  threads,  on  which  he  strung 
the  orient  pearls  of  his  fancy.  But  allowing  that  there 
is  some  force  in  this,  it  is  nevertheless  a  source  of  regret 
that  such  men  should  borrow  anything  from  others ;  for  if 
the  thread  is  proved  to  be  stolen,  doubts  are  thrown  upon 
the  pearls.  If  a  man  is  arraigned  for  stealing  pearls,  and 
it  is  proved  that  the  thread  was  stolen,  the  jury  are  not 
apt  to  be  .very  easy  of  belief  as  to  his  honestly  getting  the 
more  precious  part. 

But  there  is  a  legitimate  use  to  which  sketches  of 
sermons  may  be  put.  As  the  full  sermon  is  to  be  studied 
for  the  physiology  of  homiletics,  so  the  skeleton  may  be 


i86i.]  INTELLECTUAL  ASSIMILATION.  343 

examined  to  make  ourselves  familiar  with  the  anatomy 
of  it.  For  it  is  not  without  a  real  analogy,  that  the  out- 
line derives  its  name  from  the  bony  frame-work  of  the 
body.  That  is  a  poor  body  which  is  all  bones,  or  in 
which  they  reveal  themselves  at  every  point;  but  that 
would  be  a  very  sorrowful  body  which  had  no  bones. 
The  highest  order  of  thought  always  has  a  hard,  well- 
arranged,  organic  skeleton  under  it ;  even  as  in  physical 
nature,  while  the  lowest  forms  of  life  are  boneless,  the 
highest  are  all  vertebrate.  Now  a  man  may  buy  a  skele- 
ton, not  with  the  expectation  of  adopting  it,  but  with  the 
purpose  of  studying  it.  The  study  of  somebody  else's 
bones  may  give  him  useful  hints  as  to  the  care  and  health 
of  his  own.  A  man  can,  indeed,  no  more  make  the 
product  of  another  mind,  as  such,  an  organic  part  of  his 
own  mind,  than  he  could  wear  in  his  body  another  man's 
skeleton.  Digestion  is  the  indispensable  pre-requisite  to 
concorporation.  Bread,  as  bread,  can  never  become  a 
part  of  a  man's  body ;  but  it  goes  through  the  subtle  pro- 
cesses of  assimilation,  until  at  last  the  matter  that  once 
was  bread,  becomes  an  organ  of  the  mind  in  the  brain, 
and  its  instrument  in  the  hand.  So  must  the  thoughts 
of  others  before  they  can  be  re-produced,  be  assimilated, 
and  then  do  they  become  parts  of  us.  Authors  ought  not 
to  be  men-stealers,  but  they  are  of  necessity  cannibals, 
perfect  anthropophagi.  While,  therefore,  it  is  very  im- 
proper to  steal  an  author's  book,  it  is  highly  moral  to 
digest  it.  He  would  prosecute  you  if  he  learned  you  had 
stolen  it,  but  would  be  entirely  pleased  to  know  that  you 
had  "literally  devoured  it." 

THE   SCISSORS   AND   THE    PASTE-POT. 

"The  pen,"  says  a  modern  dramatist,  "is  mightier 
than  the  sword."  We  add,  the  scissors  are  mightier  than 
the  pen.  With  the  scissors  for  the  analytic,  and  a  good 
stiff  paste  for  the  synthetic,  men  may  be  authors  without 
thinking,  and  may  establish  a  strict  coherence  between 
paragraphs  apparently  destitute  of  all  natural  connection. 

(August  16,  1861.) 


344 


CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chaf.XYU. 


RELIGIOUS   LIGHT   LITERATURE. 


As  in  general  literature  the  mass  prefer  the  light  and 
flimsy  to  the  substantial  and  useful,  so  it  is  in  the  religious 
world, — the  class  of  books  most  largely  published  and 
bought  belongs  to  light  literature.  They  lack  thought, 
matter,  moral  force,  doctrinal  decision  and  earnest  pur- 
pose. They  are  accidental  books,  not  books  which  reflect 
a  sublime  vocation, — they  are  books  which  men  viay 
write, — not  books  which  men  must  write  to  relieve  their 
consciences  from  the  dread  of  arraignment  before  the 
Judge  for  burying  the  talent  entrusted  to  them.  .   .  . 

Many  of  the  best  popular  religious  writers  of  our  day 
a're,  at  best,  mere  gold-beaters,  though  what  they  beat  is 
not  always  gold.  They  seem  to  imagine  that  pounding 
can  put  something  into  bullion, — or  that  thought,  like 
homoeopathic  remedies,  is  potentiated  by  minute  division. 
Paganini  did  musical  miracles  on  a  single  string ;  Ole  Bull 
and  others  have  followed  him  in  this  walk;  but  none  of 
these  fiddlers  of  renown,  we  believe,  make  the  whole 
concert  one  of  isolated  cat-gut.  But  in  our  popular 
religious  literature,  we  are  often  invited  to  several  con- 
certs on  the  same  string,  and  are  entertained  through  each 
of  them  by  a  vigorous  sawing  on  a  single  note.  .  .  . 

The  taste  of  the  religious  world  is  greatly  vitiated,  the 
tone  of  piety  lowered  and  spiritual  things  rendered  dis- 
tasteful to  the  thoughtful,  by  the  excessive  wishy-washy- 
ness  of  much  of  the  current  religious  literature.   .  .   . 

Some  of  these  books  have  romantic  titles,  which  fairly 
cheat  the  young  people  into  picking  them  up  as  sen- 
sational novels,  crammed  with  murder  and  matrimony. 
But  all  the  artifices  are  vain, — they  remain  just  what  they 
were,  sermons,  pardonable  when  delivered,  because  their 
author  had  no  time  to  make  them  better, — but  unpardon- 
able when  deliberately  issued,  as  if  there  were  anything  in 
them  worth  reading. 

You  may  shatter  and  batter  the  vase  as  you  will. 
The  scent  of  the  roses  will  stick  to  it  still. 


i86i.]  IF  DOUBTFUL,   DON'T.  345 

Nothing  is  more  certain  tliat  these  books  are  very  Hght, 
than  this, — that  they  are  terribly  heavy.  This  easy  writ- 
ing is  terribly  hard  reading.  Nobody  really  enjoys  them, 
nobody  is  the  better  for  them.  One  page  of  Howe, 
Baxter,  Bunyan,  Leighton,  Edwards,  Arndt,  Bogatzky, 
of  Chalmers  or  of  James  is  worth  whole  shelves  of  this 
genus.  (November  14,  1861.) 

NOVEL    READING. 

We  wish,  once  for  all,  to  protest  against  any  one  trans- 
ferring to  us  the  work  of  his  own  conscience  in  regard 
to  the  matter  of  novel  reading.  While  we  believe  that 
there  are  some  novels  which  may  be  read  sometimes,  by 
some  people,  we  believe  that  there  are  many  novels  which 
should  be  read  by  no  one,  and  some  which  should  be 
read  by  very  few — and  that  there  are  some  for  whom  it 
would  be  best  to  read  no  novels  whatever,  not  even  the 
best.  We  would  not  consciously  pollute  our  pages  by 
noticing  even  the  names  of  novels  unfit  for  all ;  and  in 
noticing  those  whose  record  will  be  found  in  this  paper, 
we  never  mean  to  recommend  them  to  all.  The  advice 
of  a  faithful  pastor,  or  of  some  other  judicious  Christian 
friend,  should  carry  more  weight  with  it  than  any  com- 
mendations which  can  possibly  be  bestowed  upon  this  or 
that  work  of  fiction.  If  you,  good  reader,  doubt  in 
conscience  whether  you  should  read  a  novel,  you  sin  if 
you  read — no  matter  who  seems  to  countenance  it,  editor, 
pastor  or  friend.  If,  after  honestly  enlightening  your 
conscience,  you  are  clear  on  the  question  of  duty,  then 
you  need  no  endorsement.  Wherefore,  know  all  men  by 
these  presents,  that  any  readers  of  the  Lutheran  who  read 
novels,  do  it  on  their  own  responsibility.  Against  bad  or 
dubious  novels,  against  extensive  reading,  even  of  the 
good,  we  enter  a  protest — and  even  that  little  reading  of 
a  very  few  of  the  purest  and  best,  with  which  our  con- 
science has  no  trouble,  we  recommend  to  no  one.  So 
few  are  willing  to  draw  the  line,  that  total  abstinence 
here,  as  in  the  case  of  intoxicating  drinks,  seems  to  be 
the  only  absolute  safety  against  abuse. 


346  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAU TH.  [Chaf.XYIL 

WIT. 

Sydney  Smith  is  known  to  the  milHon  mainly  as  a  great 
wit,  and  he  is  worthy  of  his  renown.  But  those  who  have 
read  his  works  know  that  with  him,  as  with  all  good  men 
whom  God  has  endowed  with  that  most  fascinating  gift, 
wit  was  not  an  end,  but  the  means  to  the  end.  Like  other 
forms  of  eloquence,  it  is  to  be  prized  or  censured,  as  it  is 
used  or  abused.  Like  every  power  of  human  thought  or 
human  language,  it  is  hallowed  by  its  consecration  to 
great  ends,  or  desecrated  by  perversion  to  unworthy  ones. 
How  exquisite  are  the  humor  and  wit  of  Addison, 
directed  as  they  are,  to  the  correction  of  social  evils,  and 
to  the  interests  of  morality  and  religion.  How  mighty 
an  engine  against  the  Jesuits  were  the  Provincial  Letters 
of  Pascal.  There  was  no  weapon  of  the  Reformation 
which  its  enemies  more  dreaded,  than  the  wit  of  Luther. 
Luther,  indeed,  had,  beyond  any  other  German,  a  large 
measure  of  the  sort  of  wit  which  strikes  the  English 
mind.  He  is  irresistibly  comic  at  times.  Serious  as  are 
the  pursuits  of  clergymen,  we  believe  there  is  no  class  of 
men  in  which  there  is  so  much  real  wit  and  humor.  God 
meant  it  to  be  so.  The  power  of  seeing  things  in  the 
aspect  which  makes  us  smile,  is  a  shield  from  much  that 
is  painful  in  our  lot,  and  is  often  the  best  weapon  we  can 
use  in  staying  what  is  ridiculously  wrong.  We  could  do 
infidelity  and  evil  no  greater  good,  than  to  surrender  to 
them  a  weapon,  whose  effectiveness  they  understand  so 
well.  Men  will  laugh,  and  how  much  better  is  it  that 
they  should  laugh  with  the  truth  than  at  it.  Conjoin  wit 
with  principle,  direct  it  to  good  ends,  temper  it  with 
benevolence,  guard  it  from  excess  and  from  working  out 
of  its  true  sphere,  and  you  have  in  it  a  new  safeguard  for 
truth  and  goodness.  (November  6,  1862.) 

JEREMY    TAYLOR. 

Taylor  has  been  called  the  Shakespeare  of  divines. 
It  has  been  suggested  that  he  should  rather  be  called  the 
Spenser.     The  fact  is,  he  is  neither,  if  any  parallel  in  in- 


i86i-62.]  ENGLISH  MEN  OF  LETTERS.  347 

tellectiial  character  is  desig-ned,  but  is  as  positively  him- 
self as  Shakespeare  is  Shakespeare,  or  Spenser  Spenser. 
Richly  florid  in  his  fancy,  and  gorgeous  in  his  language, 
he  yet,  on  due  occasion,  was  a  model  of  majestic,  close 
and  sustained  reasoning.  When  he  is  most  poetical, 
Milton  hardly  surpasses  him ;  and  when  he  is  most 
logical,  Chillingworth  himself  is  not  more  masterly  as 
a  reasoner.  For  universal  use,  the  two  volumes  we 
notice  probably  take  the  first  rank.  We  would  call  them 
solid  gold,  were  it  not  for  gems  richer  than  gold,  with 
which  they  are  thick  inset.  Taylor  was  an  early  love  of 
ours;  his  works  were  one  of  the  earliest  gifts  of  one  who 
gave  them,  because  he  loved  him  and  loved  us. 

BULWER  AND  DICKENS. 

How  varied  is  genius.  We  notice  side  by  side  the  two 
greatest  living  novelists — alike  in  nothing  except  the  pos- 
session of  the  most  fascinating  and  most  indefinable  of 
gifts.  Dickens  and  Bulwer  are  supplementary  and  com- 
plementary to  each  other,  as  writers  of  fiction.  The  one 
irradiates  poverty  and  lowliness  with  sunshine.  The 
other  touches  life  among  the  high-born,  with  the  magic  of 
his  own  peculiar  refinement  of  mind  and  style.  Dickens 
is  most  perfectly  understood  by  men,  and  Bulwer  by 
women.  Where  Dickens  is  greatest,  Bulwer  is  little,  and 
where  Bulwer  is  incomparable,  Dickens  is  very  much 
worse  than  nothing.  Among  the  humbler  and  middle 
walks  of  life,  Dickens  is  princely  as  a  creator;  among  the 
highest  he  is  a  mere  caricaturist.  Where  Bulwer  sketches 
the  humble  well,  it  is  in  the  relation  of  dependence.  He 
sees  them  in  the  reflected  glory  of  their  superiors.  He 
loves  best  to  put  them  where  Dickens  never  puts  them, 
if  he  can  help  it.  Bulwer  is  aristocratic  and  scholarly. 
Dickens  is  of  the  people,  and  his  education  has  been 
drawn  from  men  direct,  much  more  than  from  books. 
Bulwer  has  been  a  great  reader  in  every  direction,  and 
loves  to  make  a  display  of  his  learning,  as  he  well  may, 
for  he  does  it  with  great  felicity.     Dickens'  allusions  to 


348  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

books  are  few,  and  his  books  are  always  of  the  class  well 
known  to  everybody. 

In  our  boyhood,  Bulwer  and  Byron  were  generally 
spoken  of  as  two  very  charming,  very  immoral,  and  con- 
sequently very  dangerous  writers.  Poor  Byron,  we  are 
afraid,  we  must  abandon  on  all  the  charges,  although  we 
do  not  consider  him  either  as  charming  as  he  is  regarded 
by  young  readers,  or  as  dangerous  as  he  is  represented 
in  the  pulpit  oratory,  which  draws  its  inspiration  from 
Pollok's  Course  of  Time.  Bulwer  we  do  not  believe, 
even  in  his  most  vulnerable  period,  to  have  been  open  to 
the  charge  of  conscious  immorality,  as  Byron  undoubtedly 
was.  What  a  writer  says,  in  the  consistency  of  the  char- 
acter he  draws,  is  not  to  be  accepted  as  the  sentiment  of 
the  writer,  nor  as  such  to  be  pleaded  against  him.  Byron, 
not  without  a  little  logic  in  his  wit,  urged  in  defense  of 
the  utterances  of  the  Arch-enemy  in  Cain,  that  it  was 
quite  impossible  to  represent  the  devil  as  talking  like  a 
clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England.  A  writer  may 
however  be  held  responsible  for  sketching — even  with 
the  object  of  exciting  abhorrence — characters  so  essen- 
tially and  irredeemably  vile,  that  mere  acquaintance  with 
them  will  do  more  mischief  than  any  possible  reprobation 
of  them  can  do  good.  Beyond  all  doubt,  the  combination 
of  fascinating  manners  and  of  moral  frivolity  in  Pelham, 
lured  many  readers  to  lower  views  of  moral  obligation, 
charmed  many  of  the  thoughtless  and  undecided  into 
false  estimates  of  the  relative  value  of  fine  manners  and 
of  deep  principle.  In  Eugene  Aram,  also,  there  may  be 
dangerous  fascination  to  the  class  of  minds  which  have 
a  disposition  to  think  that  energy  of  all  kinds  naturally 
runs  out  into  crime.  But  neither  in  Pelham  nor  in 
Eugene  Aram,  was  it  the  aim  of  Bulwer  to  produce  these 
results,  and  we  believe  those  who  read  them  most  per- 
fectly in  the  tone  and  spirit  in  which  they  were  con- 
ceived, felt  none  of  these  mischievous  effects. 

"The  last  of  the  Barons"  was  the  first  attempt  of  Bul- 
wer in  historical  romance,  on  English  ground.  It  re- 
quired no  little  courage  to  seem  to  enter  at  all  upon 


i86i-8o.]  BULIVER  AND  DICKENS.  349 

the  walk  of  the  great  magician  of  the  North,  but  Bul- 
wer's  success  justified  his  boldness.  "The  last  of  the 
Barons"  is  one  of  his  finest  works,  displaying  great  read- 
ing in  the  history  of  its  era,  as  well  as  great  richness  of 
imagination.  In  "Devereux,"  he  portrays  a  man  of  the 
last  century.  Bolingbroke  and  other  great  men  of  the 
period  appear,  but  more  as  accessories  than  as  the  main 
figures.  In  the  "Last  days  of  Pompeii,"  Buhver  reveals 
the  extent  of  his  reading  in  the  Ancient  Classics.  Most 
stories  of  the  time  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans  fail  to 
awake  any  deep  interest  in  the  heart  of  the  reader.  They 
smack  of  the  Dictionary  of  Antiquities.  Everybody  is  a 
lay-figure  to  display  the  antique  upon,  and  like  the  lay- 
figure,  has  liinges  rather  than  joints.  Bulwer  rose  above 
the  difficulties  of  his  task,  and  there  is  probably  none  of 
his  stories  more  deeply  pathetic  than  this. 

WHiatever  apology  may  be  necessary  for  the  earlier 
Bulwer.  none  need  be  made  for  him  in  his  ripest  and 
latest  stories.  They  are  pure  and  purifying,  breathing 
largely  a  morality  which  is  not  of  this  world.  The  "Cax- 
tons"  is  worthy  of  the  place  which  the  Lippincott  house 
has  given  it.  It  is  a  book,  the  charm  of  whose  story, 
great  as  it  is,  is  secondary  to  the  soundness  of  its  prin- 
ciples and  the  general  excellence  of  its  tendency. 

dickens'  letters. 

There  has  probably  never  been  a  man  who  felt  himself 
more  absolutely  than  Dickens  did.  His  self-consciousness 
smacked  of  the  pantheistic.  He  took  everything  into 
himself,  and  transfused  himself  into  everything,  with  an 
ardor  which  makes  his  writings  wholly  unique.  The  true 
children  of  his  mind — as  distinct  from  the  personalized 
humors  and  oddities,  which  are  the  ballast  of  his  writ- 
ings— were  as  real  to  him  as  the  children  born  to  him 
in  his  home.  This  identification  was  one  of  the  secrets 
of  his  great  power.  He  was  a  passionate  Actor  who 
played  himself  into  books,  which  bring  to  the  fireside  of 
the  reader  the  charm  of  the  stage,  the  power  of  the  drama, 


350  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

without  its  machinery  and  its  draw-backs.     His  novels 
fell  spontaneously  into  plays. 

This  irrepressible  individuality  of  Dickens  imparts  in- 
terest to  the  most  trivial  of  the  letters  in  this  collection : 
the  best  letters  assure  him  a  high  place,  in  the  noble,  al- 
most lost,  art  of  letter-writing.  His  letters,  with  the  self- 
depicture,  indirectly  afforded  in  his  Sketches,  Tales  and 
Novels,  and  often  directly  in  the  prefaces  to  them,  give 
us  an  Autobiography  of  him,  full  and  honest.  The  part 
amplest  in  bulk,  and  richest  in  matter,  in  this  life-sketch- 
ing from  his  own  hand,  is  found  in  the  letters.  How 
they  abound  in  picturesque  suggestions  to  the  artists  who 
were  to  illustrate  his  works,  the  author's  words  often 
transcending  the  pictures  they  were  meant  to  guide. 
What  revelations  they  make  of  his  feelings  in  the  progress 
of  his  books,  of  sympathetic  ideal  joys  and  sorrows, 
which  were  as  real  as  those  which  were  awakened  in  his 
actual  life.  Hardly  could  he  have  loved  his  own  girls, 
as  he  loved  little  Nell,  or  any  boy,  even  of  his  own  boys, 
as  he  loved  little  Paul.  His  heart  broke  itself,  and  healed 
itself,  with  its  own  imaginings.  His  letters  illustrate 
his  devotion  to  friends,  his  warm  appreciation  of  the 
notice  of  the  great,  and  his  love  of  flattery,  from  whatever 
source.  We  see  in  them  how  well  he  thought  of  those 
who  thought  well  of  him;  how  qualified,  in  general,  was 
his  admiration  of  the  works  of  others;  and  how  unquali- 
fied was  his  admiration  of  his  own.  His  appreciation  of 
little  children,  and  especially  of  the  young  folks  at  Gad's 
Hill,  is  something  beautiful  and  touching.  Of  what 
irresistible  drollery,  of  what  scathing  fierceness  he  was 
capable — how  lambent  and  how  consuming  his  words 
could  be.  Who  so  illustrated  overwhelming  labor,  rol- 
licking fun  and  boundless  enjoyment — the  massive  tread 
of  the  burdened  elephant,  the  mischievous  agility  of  the 
monkey,  the  hearth-rug  antics  of  the  kitten?  To  whom 
can  we  go  for  such  inimitable  hittings-off  of  character, 
such  delicate  discriminations,  and  such  frantic  burlesque  ? 
Who  has  been  more  princely  in  his  benefactions,  and  more 
sorrv  in  his  meanness?     What  an  accumulation  of  evi- 


i88o.]         CONTRASTS  IN  DICKENS'  CHARACTER.  351 

dence  do  his  life  and  letters  present  of  vanity,  egotism, 
selfishness,  and  truculent  coarseness,  and  on  the  other 
hand  of  ever}'  quality  with  which  these  weaknesses  seem 
incompatible.  How  pure  are  his  sketches  of  nature,  and 
how  undisguised  was  his  admiration  of  gaudy  waist- 
coats and  superfluous  jewelry.  What  exquisite  senti- 
ment he  breathes,  and  what  a  passion  for  good  eating, 
and  for  drink,  not  "from  the  liquid  brook,"  he  reveals. 
His  books  are  the  apotheosis  of  cooks  and  innkeepers. 
The  man  who  has  come  into  so  many  homes  to  soften 
asperity,  and  to  mitigate  sorrow,  lived  in  a  long  series 
of  excitements.  His  descriptions  range  from  the  lowest 
realistic  to  the  highest  fantastic,  from  the  hard  minutiae 
of  disgusting  things,  to  the  melodramatic,  all  goblins, 
limber  legs,  masks  and  blue  flames.  What  snobbery, 
what  vulgarity,  what  wit,  and  humor,  and  pathos,  what 
immortal  suggestion  and  sweetness  are  bound  up  with 
the  pitiful  littlenesses,  and  the  transcendant  power  of  this 
inconsistent  being,  this  majestic  genius !  All  these,  and 
how  many  things  more,  pass  before  us  in  these  fascinat- 
ing letters — the  panorama  of  a  hemispheric  mind.  Had 
his  moral  dignity  been  on  the  level  of  his  genius,  what  a 
consummate  man  he  would  have  been.  Forster's  life  of 
him  would  not  then  have  been  one  of  the  most  melancholy 
books  ever  written,  from  which  readers  who  had  idolized 
Dickens  turned  away,  heart-sick  with  the  feeling  that 
the  man  had  destroyed  the  works,  and  that  they  could 
no  more  read  him  wMth  the  old  delight.  But  his  genius 
w^ins  the  world  back.  Our  judgment  may  take  its  cold 
tone  from  his  biographer,  but  our  hearts  will  be  fired  by 
the  old  magic.  The  letters  justify  the  conflicting  verdict 
of  the  head  and  of  the  heart.  We  have  seen  how  they 
sustain  those  who  think  harshly  of  him,  but  they  will 
none  the  less  be  read,  and  none  the  less  awake  an  admira- 
tion which  will  outlive  "the  pity  of  it."  In  the  pure 
power  of  amusing  and  delighting,  we  have  read  no 
collection  of  letters  equal  to  Dickens's.  His  genius  is  an 
electric  light  in  which  the  merest  filament  brightens  till  it 
dazzles.     The  tension  of  his  later  life  is  such  as  to  pro- 


352  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.XVIL 

duce  a  sense  of  exhaustion  in  the  reader.  Dickens  put 
himself  upon  the  rack  and  fainted  more  than  once  before 
he  died.  To  work  as  if  Hfe  had  no  relaxation,  and  to 
devote  himself  to  amusement,  as  if  life  had  no  work,  was 
the  disastrous  and  impracticable  combination  at  which 
he  seemed  to  be  aiming.  Had  he  not  lived  so  fast,  both 
in  toil  and  pleasure,  he  might  be  living  yet.  His  love  of 
money,  his  passion  for  stage  efifect.  his  intense  desire  for 
applause,  which  took  him  so  much  out  of  authorship  into 
playing  and  dramatic  readings,  helped  to  weaken  and 
lower,  and  at  last  to  kill  him.  He  robbed  all  generations 
to  come,  of  what  might  yet  have  been  the  outcome  of  his 
affluent  imagination ;  and  what  a  poor  compensation  for 
this  is  his  fame  as  a  reader,  and  the  transient  delight 
which  he  gave  in  that  character.  His  brain,  nerves  and 
stomach  were  stimulated  to  their  highest  pitch.  His 
vivacity  almost  reached  the  excesses  of  mania.  He 
worked  off  one  excitement  by  another.  A  constitution  to 
which  moderation  might  have  given  full  and  healthy  play 
for  fourscore  years,  broke  down  when  all  the  intellectual 
powers  of  this  marvellous  child  of  genius  were  yet  in 
untouched  vigor. 

MISS   MULOCK. 

We  confess  to  something  more  than  an  admiration  for 
Dinah  Maria  Mulock  Craik's  maturest  stories.  We  love 
them.  Each  comes  to  our  fireside  like  the  embodiment  of 
a  saintly  woman,  a  real  presence  of  sweetness,  innocence 
and  love.  We  shall  never  forget  when  our  heart  was  first 
won.  After  days  of  intense  pain  we  once  lay,  helpless 
still,  but  able  to  enjoy  home  voices;  unable  to  read,  but 
happy  in  being  allowed  to  listen ;  and  the  first  book  from 
human  hand,  that  was  chosen,  was  "John  Halifax,  Gentle- 
man"— a  book  with  but  one  fault — its  pathos  is  almost 
too  melting  to  be  borne,  too  like  a  real  breaking  of  heart. 
What  silent,  sweet  tears  has  it  called  to  human  eyes,  and 
what  powers  of  love  and  resignation,  not  of  earth,  has 
it  put  into  human  hearts — and  the  books  which  followed 
it  are  like  it.     Christianity  could  stand,  as  of  God,  had  it 


i88o.]  AN  VNEMOTIOXAL  PHILOSOPHER.  353 

no  evidence,  but  that  it  has  shaped  such  women  as  Dinah 
Alulock.  and  has  opened  such  springs  of  light  and  peace, 
as  flow  through  her  best  works  from  the  eternal  source 
itself. 

Dr.  McCosh.    (The  Emotions.) 

This  book  is  the  outgrowth  of  Dr.  McCosh's  personal 
dissatisfaction  with  the  account  of  our  feelings  and  emo- 
tions, given  in  other  books.  The  words  used  to  mark 
these  mental  conditions,  are,  he  thinks,  very  vague  and 
ambiguous,  even  in  the  most  perfect  languages,  living 
and  dead.  Dr.  McCosh  proposes  to  relieve  the  obscurity 
of  the  account,  and  the  inadequacy  of  the  phrases,  by 
separating  the  emotions  from  the  feelings,  and  by  renew- 
ing the  attempt  to  analyze,  describe,  and  classify  the  emo- 
tions as  distinguished  from  other  mental  qualities.  By 
giving  due  proportion  to  the  psychical  and  physiological 
in  the  emotions,  he  hopes  to  secure  the  bodily  its  due, 
without  furnishing  any  succor  to  Materialism. 

Dr.  McCosh,  as  becomes  a  philosopher,  writes  of  emo- 
tion without  much  display  of  it.  Even  the  most  animat- 
ing of  passions — love — he  discusses  with  nothing  sug- 
gestive of  the  tone  of  courtship  or  of  the  honeymoon, 
but  rather  of  a  serene,  almost  Platonic,  approach  to  the 
era  of  the  golden  or  the  diamond  wedding. 

His  whole  manner  of  treating  it  has  a  salutary  ten- 
dency to  correct  the  indiscreet  ardor  and  over-estimate, 
into  which  youthful  minds  might  be  drawn  by  such 
delineations,  for  example,  as  those  of  his  talented,  but 
somewhat  impulsive  countryman,  Robert  Burns,  who 
illustrates  the  emotions  perhaps  as  well  as  Dr.  McCosh 
does,  but  who,  on  the  other  hand,  seems  incapable  of 
philosophizing  about  them  at  all.  Nothing  apparently 
could  be  better  suited  to  the  present  needs  of  Princeton, 
than  a  quieting  or  even  a  sedative  mode  of  discussing 
the  passions,  as  the  tendency  of  late  in  that  venerable 
and  flourishing  seat  of  learning  seems  to  be  toward  an 
emotional  vivacity,  not  wholly  in  keeping  with  the 
sobriety  naturally  expected  from  lovers  of  learning.     Dr. 

23 


354  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

McCosh  has  largely  drawn  upon  the  physiologists  for 
what  might  almost  be  styled  recipes  for  expression,  but 
the  faces  of  students  in  mischief  or  under  discipline 
would  have  furnished  living  subjects  for  more  vivid 
pictures  than  Bell  or  Cogan  or  Darwin  ever  drew. 

There  is  one  conspicuous  merit  in  Dr.  McCosh's  style. 
He  rarely  writes  a  sentence  which  has  to  be  read  twice 
to  see  its  meaning.  This  is  one  of  the  sources  of  his 
great  and  deserved  popularity.  If  you  are  not  quite  sure 
that  you  have  seen  to  the  bottom  of  the  thing,  you  are 
always  sure  that  you  have  seen  to  the  bottom  of  President 
McCosh's  view  of  it.  That  at  least  is  lucid,  however  ob- 
scure the  subject  may  be.  The  style  of  the  book  before 
us,  however,  though  generally  clear,  is  a  little  slip-shod 
at  times.  Dr.  McCosh  is  one  of  the  most  rhetorical  of 
metaphysicians,  and  his  wealth  of  illustrations  sometimes 
tempts  him  to  profusion;  and  unguarded  profusion  is  in 
danger  of  running  into  inelegance. 

Dr.  McCosh  abounds  in  allusions  to  general  literature, 
without  impressing  us  with  the  idea  that  he  has  a  very 
thorough  acquaintance  with  it. 

We  read  with  special  closeness  the  chapter  on  the 
Ludicrous,  to  see  whether  it  helped  to  remove  the  odious 
charge,  made  more  especially  by  that  lawless  satirist, 
Sydney  Smith,  that  appreciation  of  wit  is  not  one  of  the 
strong  points  of  the  Scotch  character.  With  the  modest 
caution  which  ever  marks  your  true  reviewer,  we  must 
reserve  our  decision  on  so  grave  a  question,  but  this  will 
not  preclude  the  remark  that  the  seriousness  of  the 
chapter  in  question  borders  on  solemnity — and  yet  to 
some  the  chapter  may  be  brimming  over  with  "Sport 
which  wrinkled  Care  derides,"  and  its  humorous  sug- 
gestion may  evoke  "Laughter,  holding  both  his  sides," 
for  if  Dr.  McCosh  be  right  in  supposing  that  the  familiar 
passage  in  which  Barrow  describes  wit,  could  not  have 
been  uttered  "without  exciting  the  laughter  of  his  con- 
gregation," the  cis-Atlantic  and  trans-Atlantic  ideas  of 
the  ludicrous  have  a  wider  gulf  than  the  ocean  between 
them. 


i88o.]  UNAUTHORIZED  BOOKS  OF  WORSHIP.  355 

Dr.  AlcCosh  has  made  no  very  large  use  of  any  authors 
except  those  who  write  in  English.  This  has  perhaps 
added  to  the  clearness  of  the  book,  but  not  to  its  depth  or 
richness.  No  writer  on  any  great  philosophical  theme  can 
afford  to  ignore  France  and  Germany,  and  no  philosophy 
more  than  the  Scotch  needs  fresh  blood  from  other  venis. 
It  is  impossible  that  anything  should  come  from  Dr.  Mc- 
Cosh's  pen  which  should  be  destitute  of  value,  and  have 
a  tendency  other  than  good  in  the  main.  He  has  attained 
a  great  and  just  renown  as  an  able  vindicator  of  some  of 
the  most  sacred  interests  in  the  world  of  thought.  This 
book,  which  is  far  below  the  standard  of  his  best  works, 
nevertheless  proves  itself,  in  common  with  them  all,  clear, 
wise,  and  practical.  Yet  it  strikes  us  as  rather  homiletical 
than  philosophical.  Much  of  it  reads  as  if  it  had  formed 
part  of  a  series  of  sermons — and  very  good  sermons  they 
w^ere,  or  w^ould  have  been — but  sermons,  even  good 
ones,  are  the  lurking  place  of  platitude.  In  them  it  may 
be  pardoned,  but  it  seriously  injures  a  book. 

SUNDAY  SCHOOL  SONGS. 

A  model  notice,  kindly  forwarded  with  this  book, 
describes  it  as  "all  sweetness."  We  find  "White  Robes" 
sutificiently  colorless  to  deserve  its  name,  and  with  noth- 
ing in  it  to  pre\'ent  its  use  in  such  Sunday  Schools  as 
make  non-committal  sweetness  their  standard. 

It  has  neither  index  of  words,  nor  any  discoverable 
plan ;  the  melodies  are  such  as  are  common  to  compila- 
tions of  its  kind;  the  harmonies  are  largely  made  up  of 
good-natured  octaves  and  fifths  which  put  nobody  out. 

Turning  from  the  musical  features,  which  we  com- 
mitted to  the  judgment  of  a  friend,  we  would  say  a 
word  about  "White  Robes,"  as  a  collection  of  hymns. 
The  book  belongs  to  the  abundant  and  ever-increasing 
class  which  helps  the  Sunday  Schools  to  undo  the  proper 
work  of  the  church.  The  Sunday  School  needs  to  be 
guarded  rigidly  in  this  matter  of  unauthorized  books 
of  w^orship.     But  just  where  caution  is  most  needed,  it  is 


356  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

most  neglected.  There  is  no  mercy  for  the  Httle  ones 
of  the  church  who  in  their  confiding  helplessness,  need  it 
so  much.  These  books  substitute  for  healthy  Christianity, 
with  its  self-renunciation,  their  namby-pamby  egotism, 
with  its  weary  round  of  misused,  pious  phrases.  Nothing 
could  be  worse  than  their  style,  except  their  matter,  which 
is  a  compound  of  vague  sentimentalism,  running  over 
sometimes  into  pagan  inanity,  of  Pelagian  self-glorifica- 
tion, under  the  mask  of  humility,  of  every  kind  of  affecta- 
tion which  departs  from  the  truth  in  nature,  and  the 
truth  in  grace,  of  vain  repetitions,  of  sonorous  nonsense, 
and  of  nonsense  not  sonorous.  "White  Robes"  is  not 
worse  than  some  others  in  its  class — that  would  be  next 
to  impossible — but  it  is  a  fair  representative  of  the  whole, 
and  our  warning  is  not  meant  for  it  apart  from  its  class, 
but  for  it,  in  its  class,  and  for  its  class  with  it. 

TEMPERANCE    JEWELS. 

Furnished  with  "White  Robes,"  some  weeks  ago,  we 
are  now,  by  the  kindness  of  the  same  house,  fitted  out 
with  "jewels,"  which,  from  their  very  title,  we  are  pre- 
pared to  find  of  the  purest  water.  The  title  of  the  book 
naturally  awakens  sympathy,  for  temperance  is  so  great 
a  virtue,  and  all  departures  from  it,  whether  in  eating, 
drinking,  dressing,  singing,  or  the  issue  of  music  books, 
are  so  pernicious,  that  anything  which  promises  to  aid  its 
beneficent  work  gives  us  great  pleasure.  Nor  was  our 
sympathy  diminished  when  we  found,  as  we  expected  to 
find,  that  this  book  specially  purposes  to  aid  in  checking 
the  awful  and  widespread  vice  of  drunkenness,  and  to  do 
what  it  could,  both  by  prevention  and  cure,  to  correct 
an  evil  whose  mischief  no  language  can  overstate.  To 
its  general  intent  therefore  we  give  our  most  cordial  ap- 
proval. Nor  will  we  deny  that  in  executing  its  purpose, 
it  has  gathered  some  beautiful  and  impressive  verses,  and 
some  very  popular  music.  With  this  our  commendation 
ends.  The  conception  of  this  book  rests  almost  entirely 
upon  the   current    false   hypothesis,   that   the   corrective 


i88o.]  INTEMPERATE  TEMPERANCE.  357 

of  drunkenness  is  to  show  vividly  what  drunkenness 
makes — its  wreck  and  despair.  The  true  problem  is  to 
reach  what  makes  drunkenness — to  cut  up  the  roots  of 
the  evil ;  to  prevent  it,  rather  than  to  postpone  effort  to 
the  time  when  we  may  attempt  to  cure  it.  Smallpox  is 
rarely  reached  by  medicine,  but  it  is  prevented  by  vaccina- 
tion. The  most  fearful  picture  ever  drawn  by  the  words 
of  man,  of  the  horrors  that  wait  upon  confirmed  drunken- 
ness, fall  below  the  frightful  images  which  haunt  the 
consciousness  of  the  drunkard.  He  may  be  dull,  and 
unimaginative,  but  Dante's  Purgatory  and  Dante's  Hell 
have  no  such  picture  as  a  faithful  transcript  of  his  soul 
would  present.  This  book,  like  nearly  all  of  its  class, 
with  all  its  intensity  of  language,  bears  a  stamp  of  un- 
reality, has  a  trademark  character,  and  in  a  weak  senti- 
mentality, with  stereotype  thought  and  stereotype  phrase, 
dandles  with  its  awful  theme  in  the  vein  of  the  forcible- 
feeble.  It  hurts  everything,  however  true,  by  overstate- 
ment. It  assumes  homes  to  be  "almost  divine,"  ap- 
parently by  mere  exclusion  of  strong  drink,  and  overdoes 
things  generally,  as  if  intemperateness  in  drink  were  to 
be  overcome  by  intemperateness  in  speech.  Fiends  howl, 
and  pandemonium  rages,  and  blue  lights  glare,  and  snakes 
bite,  and  demons  dance  with  a  persistent  vigor  and  repeti- 
tion, smacking  more  of  the  melodrama  than  of  real  life, 
and  often  by  their  absurdity  provoke  laughter,  when  the 
thing  itself  is  of  the  gravest  sadness.  There  is  a  homoeo- 
pathic treatment,  if  not  in  bulk,  yet  in  principle;  the 
maudlin  in  drink  is  checked  by  the  maudlin  in  verse. 
Next  to  the  under-world,  the  army  and  navy  are  drawn 
upon  for  illustration.  Banners  wave  on  every  page, 
armor  is  put  on,  trumpets  blare,  drums  beat,  the  boys 
fall  into  line  and  fill  up  ranks,  swords  are  drawn  from 
their  scabbards,  bayonet  charges  made,  forlorn  hopes 
rallied,  ramparts  scaled,  guns  spiked,  the  other  side 
whipped  fearfully,  and  our  side  triumphant  on  the  field, 
intoxicated  indeed,  but  only  with  joy,  and  tossing  of¥ 
bumpers,  but  positively  with  nothing  but  cold  water.  Or 
ships  are  sailing.     If  with  no  other  beverage  but  what  is 


358  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

in  their  water  casks,  they  bound  over  the  billows  with 
all  sails  spread,  the  crews  singing  merrily,  and  only  stop- 
ping to  "flash  their  toplights,"  the  storms  all  hushed,  or 
regarded  with  disdain.  Or  if  they  be  in  port  (the  harbor, 
not  the  beverage),  they  ride  with  firm  anchor,  which 
never  slips,  and  with  strong  cables  which  never  break. 
But  if  the  ship  deals  out  grog,  she  drifts  along  under  black 
clouds  and  a  stormy  sky,  her  rudder  unshipped,  her 
anchors  lost,  her  pilot,  captain  and  crew  inebriated,  until 
at  last  she  strikes  on  a  rock,  and  goes  down  with  every 
soul  on  board — in  water  undoubtedly,  but  alas!  not  of  it. 
Occasionally  the  railroad  is  drawn  on,  and  the  importance 
of  looking  for  the  lights  and  putting  on  the  brakes  is 
urged,  but  the  nautical  and  military  carry  the  day. 

The  writers  no  doubt  are  opposed  to  the  license  laws, 
but  they  use  the  so-called  poetic  license — after  carefully 
removing  it  from  the  domain  of  all  law — to  an  alarming, 
or,  shall  we  say,  to  an  intemperate  extreme.  One  writer 
makes  Salvation  rhyme  with  Contagion,  altogether  in 
the  style  of  Mrs.  Gamp,  who  would  have  pronounced  the 
former  word  "salvagion."  Another  of  the  poets,  with 
an  astounding  mingling  of  metaphors,  sings :  "Let  me 
bear  the  cross,  Make  it  my  daily  food." 

A  friend  remarked  that  certain  reviews  in  a  certain 
paper  were  "a  little  severe."  The  critic,  thus  criticized, 
said,  "Tell  me  frankly,  what  were  the  severest  things  in 
the  notices  ?"  and  the  reluctant  complainant  faltered  out, 
"The  quotations."  To  this  severity  we  are  obliged  to 
come,  in  self-vindication.  One  of  the  poems  will  interest 
the  naturalist  and  the  moralist  equally.  It  commences 
with  a  line  rather  startling  for  a  total  abstinence  hymn 
book — "My  pretty  bird,  pray  what  do  you  drink?"  But 
if  the  unwary  reader  thinks  the  artful  question  is  pre- 
liminary to  getting  the  bird  to  "take  something,"  he  will 
find  himself  very  much  mistaken.  The  question  simply 
prepares  the  way  to  ascertaining  to  what  the  bird  owes 
its  clear  voice.  The  question  frankly  owns  its  purport, 
by  urging  in  an  insinuating  way,  "You  need  strong 
elixirs,  I  should  think.  This  clime   [New  England?]   is 


i88o.]  A  COMPETITIVE  EXAMINATION.  359 

so  severe."  Need  we  inform  the  reader  what  the  bird 
(wliich  turns  out  to  be  a  robin)  does  drink?  We  will  not 
insult  his  intelligence  by  doing  so.  In  the  next  stanza, 
with  a  daring  we  should  hardly  have  expected  of  a  lady — 
for  we  feel  morally  confident  the  author  is  a  lady,  and  a 
very  young  one — she  ventures  near  enough  to  a  "dear 
bee,"  whether  the  domesticated  bee,  or  the  "bumble-bee," 
is  not  stated,  most  probably  the  latter,  as  its  habits  are 
more  strictly  ascetic  than  those  of  the  tenant  of  the  hive — 
and  asks  the  "dear  bee,"  "What  tonic  do  you  use," 
"Midst  unhealthful  dews?"  The  "dear  bee,"  with  a  per- 
sistent firmness  in  striking  contrast  with  a  familiar  reply 
in  Pinafore,  says,  "I'm  always,  yes,  always,  I'm  free  to 
take  a  sup,"  "The  tonic  found  in  Flora's  cup."  Next  the 
"sweet  rose"  is  appealed  to,  to  account  for  the  redness  of 
her  cheeks,  and  the  excellence  of  her  spirit.  And  here  it 
saddens  us  to  see  something  of  a  reprehensible  artfulness, 
an  approach  to  the  adroit  but  unworthy  practices  of  a 
detective,  in  an  attempt  too  obvious  to  be  concealed  or 
denied,  whose  aim  is  to  mislead  the  rose,  and  to  get  her 
into  damaging  admissions  in  regard  to  herself,  to  which 
she  is  cunningly  prompted  by  the  suggestion.  "Wine 
gives  a  glow  of  good  health,  'tis  said.  If  used  exactly 
right."  But  the  "fair  rose,"  seeing  through  this  deep 
device,  and  treating  it  with  beautiful  disdain,  "Curled 
her  pretty  lip,"  and  informed  "E.  A.  H."  tliat  she  drinks 
rain  and  "pure  dew  drops ;"  let  us  hope  not  those  "un- 
healthful dews,"  which  it  w^as  feared  in  the  second 
stanza,  might  undermine  the  constitution  of  the  "dear 
bee,"  and  reduce  him  to  the  use  of  tonics. 

This  ought  to  be  convincing  if  there  be  anything  in  the 
repertory  of  a  young  lady's  logic  which  can  convince 
anybody,  and  yet  some  people  who  are  on  the  wrong 
side  will  not  be  convinced.  Even  people  who  grant  the 
conclusion,  and  stand  by  cold  water  (not  excluding  milk, 
tea,  chocolate,  coffee,  and  lemonade)  might  urge  that  the 
premises  are  parallel  with  those  which  put  in  similar  shape 
might  run  thus : 


360  CHARLES  PORT  ERF  I  ELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVII. 

"My  pretty  bird,  pray  what  do  you  eat? 

That  keeps  your  voice  so  wondrous  sweet?" 

The  robni  sang,  in  merry  note, 
"  Fresh  insects  for  a  singer's  throat ; 

Fresh  insects,  fresh  insects,  fresh  insects  straight 
for  me." 

Will  those  who  thrust  themselves  into  great  move- 
ments without  vocation,  ever  realize  that  silly  argument 
weakens  what  it  is  meant  to  help? 

We  would  particularly  desire  that  books  which  are 
designed  to  aid  in  the  temperance  work  should  be  adapted 
for  young  men,  whose  perils  are  so  great,  and  whom  it 
is  so  difficult  to  get  to  serious  thought  upon  the  subject. 
When  books  meant  to  recommend  sobriety,  make  it 
ridiculous,  what  shall  be  done  ?  Here  is  something,  com- 
mencing, "Where  are  you  going  so  fast,  young  man?" 
which  goes  on  to  charge  him  with  having  a  cup  in  his 
hand,  and  tells  him,  "A  serpent  sleeps  down  in  the  depths 
of  that  cup,"  "A  monster  is  there  that  will  swallow  you 

up." 

In  another  of  these  songs  it  is  announced,  "We're  com- 
ing, We're  coming,"  "Our  watchword  is  'temperance,' 
let  Bacchus  beware,  For  the  pledge  of  our  army  will  bring 
him  despair."  "Old  King  Alcohol's  army  we'll  surely 
put  down;  He's  slaughtered  his  thousands,  but  now  he 
must  yield.  For  our  legion  has  risen  and  taken  the  field, 
We're  coming,  We're  coming."  With  this  modest  esti- 
mate of  themselves,  come  on  "the  fearless  and  free,  Like 
the  winds  of  the  desert,  the  waves  of  the  sea,  True  sons 
of  our  sires,  who  did  battle  of  yore.  When  the  foe's 
haughty  tyrants  ran  wild  on  our  shore."  When  we  con- 
sider what  injury  good  causes  have  to  endure  at  the  hands 
of  those  who  undertake  to  do  them  service,  we  can  only 
wonder  at  the  providence,  which  preserves  them  from 
being  driven  clean  out  of  the  world. 


EIGHTEENTH  CHAPTER. 

JOURNEY  TO  EUROPE  AND  LUTHER-BIOGRAPHY. 

1880-1882. 

It  was  most  natural  that  the  Church  should  look  to 
the  author  of  the  Conservative  Reformation  as  the  man 
best  fitted  to  give  her,  some  day,  an  English  biography 
of  Dr.  Martin  Luther. 

Through  his  whole  life  he  had  closely  studied  all  the 
scenes  and  all  the  actors  in  the  great  drama  of  the 
Reformation.  He  had  so  profound  an  understanding 
of  the  mind  and  life-work  of  the  great  Reformer,  so 
familiar  an  acquaintance  with  his  writings,  and  so 
enthusiastic  an  admiration  and  love  for  him:  and  he 
himself  was  known  to  us  all  to  have  such  brilliant  gifts 
of  thought,  description,  grouping  and  portraiture,  that 
we  allowed  ourselves  to  anticipate  with  delight  a  result 
which  would  do  high  honor  to  the  writer,  to  our  Amer- 
ican Church,  and  to  the  great  subject  of  portraiture. 
(Dr.  B.  M.  Schmucker,  Memorial  p.  17.) 

As  far  back  as  1861  the  Board  of  Publication  had 
requested  him  to  write  a  Life  of  Luther,  "adapted  to  the 
minds  of  children,"  not  exceeding  160  pages.  In  August, 
1879,  the  Pittsburgh  Synod  asked  him  by  formal  resolu- 
tion to  give  to  the  Church  such  a  biography.  In  an 
editorial  reference  to  the  action  of  that  Synod,  in  the 
Lutheran  and  Missionary  (December  4,  1879,)  Dr. 
Krotel  remarks : 

We  are  persuaded  that  a  life  of  Luther  by  Dr. 
Krauth  would  possess*  the  very  features  that  are  missed 

361 


362  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIIL 

in  Koestlin's,  and  that,  as  regards  life-like  portraiture, 
beauty  of  style  and  adaptedness  to  our  wants  and  tastes, 
he  would  give  us  a  life  of  Luther  that  would  at  once 
take  rank  as  one  of  the  best  biographies  of  the  day. 
We  sincerely  hope,  he  will  go  to  work  at  once,  so  that 
the  book  may  be  ready  in  1883. 

Ever  since  that  time  we  find  in  his  correspondence 
frequent  references  to  this  project.  Thus  in  a  letter 
to  the  Rev.  A.  Pflueger,  (October,  1879,)  :  "I  should 
like  very  much  to  write  a  life  of  Luther,  but  at  the 
present  time  I  am  too  busy  to  think  seriously  of  it.  Per- 
haps I  may,  if  my  gracious  God  be  pleased  to  spare  my 
life,  write  a  sketch  or  study  of  Luther's  life,  preparatory 
to  a  possible  more  extended  life  in  after  years."  And 
to  Dr.  Jacobs:  "If  my  life  and  health  are  spared  I  may 
one  day  think  of  the  Life  of  Luther."  (January  3, 
1880.)  And  again:  "I  am  thinking  yet  more  seriously 
of  the  Life  of  Luther.  My  friend  Dobler  is  very  full  of 
it,  and  my  visit  to  him  recently  has  tended  to  brace  me 
up,  but  the  work  is  appalling."  (April  10,  1880.)  After 
the  meeting  of  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania  in  Lan- 
caster he  writes  to  his  daughter,  who  was  on  a  visit  to 
her  friend.  Miss  Weyman,  in  Pittsburgh,  (June  i,  1880)  : 
"I  reached  home  Thursday  evening,  having  had  a  pleas- 
ant time  at  Synod.  A  resolution  was  unanimously 
passed,  (offered  by  Dr.  Spaeth)  requesting  me  to  pre- 
pare a  Life  of  Luther,  to  be  ready  for  the  400th  anni- 
versary of  Luther's  birth,  1883.  ...  I  am  getting  ready 
every  day  for  Luther.  Ask  Miss  Harriett,  if  she  has 
anything  illustrative  of  Germany." 

He  fully  realized  the  truth  of  what  his  friend.  Dr. 
Robert  Ellis  Thompson,  had  said  in  the  Sunday  School 
Times,  in  a  review  of  Peter  Bayne's  Martin  Luther,  his 
Life  and  Work:  "Luther  still  waits  for  his  English  bio- 
grapher.    He  must  be  a  man  who  has  given  the  best 


i88o.]  EUROPEAN    TRIP  ARRANGED.  363 

years  of  his  life  to  it.  who  has  mastered,  not  a  part, 
but  the  whole  of  the  German  literature  of  the  subject, 
who  has  read  through  all  the  Reformer's  works,  and 
much  contemporary  writing  besides,  and  who  has  so 
steeped  himself  in  the  thought  of  the  time,  and,  above 
all,  of  its  hero,  that  he  can  interpret  it  to  our  age."  In 
addition  to  all  this  he  felt  that,  to  give  life  to  his  por- 
traiture of  the  Reformation-Hero,  the  biographer  must 
be  familiar  with  the  scenes  of  his  life,  having  visited 
and  studied  the  Luther-places  of  the  Fatherland. 

In  the  providence  of  God  this  requisite  also  for  the 
Luther-Biographer  was  to  be  promptly  suDDlied  in  Dr. 
Krauth's  journey  to  Europe.  Some  time  in  the  Spring 
of  1880  Mr.  J.  W.  B.  Dobler,  cashier  of  the  West  Side 
Bank.  New  York,  happened  to  be  on  a  visit  to  Dr. 
Spaeth  in  Philadelphia.  He  had  planned  to  send  two 
of  his  children  to  Germany,  to  finish  their  education,  and 
had  asked  Dr.  Spaeth's  advice  and  co-operation  in  the 
matter.  Thus  it  happened,  that  after  some  correspond- 
ence, the  two  met  in  Philadelphia.  At  the  table,  inci- 
dentally, the  remark  was  made  that  Dr.  Krauth  had 
never  been  in  Germany,  and  it  was  pointed  out,  how 
desirable,  yea  indispensable,  a  visit  to  the  Fatherland 
would  seem  to  be,  for  the  future  biographer  of  Martin 
Luther.  Mr.  Dobler  was  deeply  impressed  with  that 
conversation,  and  with  his  characteristic  determination 
at  once  set  to  work  to  interest  some  friends  of  Dr. 
Krauth  in  a  plan  to  furnish  him  the  means  for  a  journey 
to  Europe.  He  succeeded  in  a  very  short  time,  and  about 
the  middle  of  June  Mr.  (now  Judge)  Wm.  H.  Staake 
and  Dr.  Spaeth  had  the  pleasure  of  delivering  to  Dr. 
Krauth  a  handsome  check,  which  was  to  enable  him  to 
undertake  the  journey  to  the  Luther-land.  Dr.  Krauth 
acknowledged  the  gift  in  the  following  note  to  Dr.  A. 
Spaeth : 


364  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIII. 

4004  Pine  St.,  Phila.,  June  17,  1880. 
My  Dear  Brother: 

...  I  was  strongly  impressed  at  first  with  the  con- 
viction that  I  could  not  go.  The  reasons  were  twofold, 
first,  that  I  thought  the  time  would  be  too  short,  and 
secondly,  I  feared  that  my  University  duties  might  neces- 
sitate an  earlier  return  than  I  might,  under  ordinary 
circumstances,  be  obliged  to  make.  But  a  long  talk  which 
I  had  yesterday  with  Dr.  Stille  satisfied  me  that  I  can 
do  a  great  deal  in  the  time  I  should  have,  and  that  tem- 
porary arrangements  could  be  made  in  regard  to  the  Uni- 
versity matters,  which  would  obviate  the  difficulties  in 
that  direction.  I,  therefore,  gladly  accept  the  generous 
kindness  of  the  dear  friends  who  have  made  practicable 
the  great  dream  of  my  life.  I  seem  to  myself  to  be  get- 
ting ready  to  leave  the  world,  and  enter  on  another  state, 
so  long  and  absorbingly  has  the  vision  of  visiting  Europe 
floated  before  my  imagination.  I  go,  not  for  pleasure, 
though  I  anticipate  a  great  deal  of  the  purest  pleasure 
of  my  life,  nor  for  health,  though  I  believe  that  I  shall 
come  back  relieved  of  the  strain  of  overwork.  I  shall 
go  with  a  sense  of  vocation  for  a  work  which  the  Church 
has  laid  upon  me — a  work,  than  which  nothing  more  con- 
genial could  be  offered  me.  As  the  work  has  shaped 
itself  into  plan  for  some  months,  I  have  more  and  more 
longed  to  depict  the  Germany  amid  whose  influences,  in 
nature,  art  and  man,  our  great  hero  was  divinely  edu- 
cated.* 

I  have  been  reading  with  eagerness  all  the  books  I 
could  command  which  shed  light  on  this  theme — to-day 
my  relief  map  of  Germany  came — and  an  hour  on  the 
spot,  a  look  at  the  place,  will  in  many  cases  be  all  that  is 

*When  he  visited  Germany  it  was  clear  that  he  had  a  knowledge 
and  a  ready  knowledge,  not  merely  of  Luther  and  of  the  external 
incidents  of  Luther's  life,  but  as  well  of  all  the  prominent  German 
theologians,  and  of  the  history  and  intercalations  of  their  doctrines, 
a  knowledge  such  as  scarcely  any  one  in  Germany  possessed. 

(Caspar  Ren6  Gregory,  Letter  from  Athens,  July  7,  1886.) 


i88o.]  DEPARTURE  FOR  EUROPE.  365 

needed  to  close  up,  in  sharp  and  well  dctined  outline,  the 
picture  I  wish  to  have  in  my  mind. 

I  wish  to  get  ready  to  sail  on  the  steamer  Illinois 
which  leaves  this  port  June  26.  I  shall  be  truly  grateful 
for  any  hints  which  will  help  me  in  making  my  voyage 
and  journey  happy  and  profitable. 

Believe  me,  my  very  dear  Brother,  w^ith  deepest  Christ- 
ian affection  and  gratitude,  ever  vours, 

C.  P.  K. 

Dr.  Krauth  was  fortunate  in  securing  for  his  journey 
the  genial  companionship  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Jacob  Fry, 
then  pastor  of  Trinity  Church,  in  Reading,  Pa.,  whose 
practical  turn  of  mind  and  whose  kindliness  of  heart 
proved  to  be  of  the  greatest  value  on  their  common  pil- 
grimage. Dr.  Krotel  sent  him  a  pleasant  farewell :  "I 
content  myself  with  writing  a  line  or  two,  simply  to  wish 
you  a  prosperous  voyage  and  a  real  good  time  on  the 
other  side,  especially  in  the  land,  and  in  the  homes  and 
haunts  of  Luther.  I  have  no  doubt  that  you  will  richly 
enjoy  your  visit  and  that,  like  a  busy  bee,  you  will  come 
back  richly  laden,  to  the  Lutheran  hive  in  America,  and 
our  mouths  will  in  due  season  be  filled  with  the  sweetest 
of  honey."  (June  24,  1880.)  On  Saturday,  June  26, 
1880,  the  travelers  embarked  in  the  S.  S.  "Illinois"  from 
Philadelphia  for  Oueenstown. 

Dr.  Fry  published  some  interesting  sketches  of  their 
trip  in  the  Helper,  September  to  November,  1880,  and 
in  the  Lutheran  and  Missionary.  We  can  only  give  a 
bare  outline  of  the  itinerary,  adding  a  few  personal 
letters  of  Dr.  Krauth,  written  from  abroad. 

On  Wednesday,  July  7th,  they  landed  at  Queenstown : 
"Thanks  be  to  a  gracious  God  for  His  tender  mercies." — 
After  a  visit  to  Killarney  and  Dublin  (St.  Patrick's 
Cathedral)  they  crossed  over  to  England,  and  spent  a 
pleasant  Sunday  with  Dean  How^son  in  Chester.  Dr. 
Krauth  paid  a  flying  visit  to  Edinburgh  (Roslyn  Castle 


366  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIII. 

and  Chapel)  and  joined  his  companion  again  in  London, 
where  they  attended  service  in  St.  Paul's  on  Sunday,  July 
1 8th.  From  London  they  crossed  over  to  France, — "The 
earthly  so  living,  the  spiritual  so  dead" — and  spent  four 
days  in  Paris.  After  four  days  in  Cologne  they  went  up 
the  Rhine  on  the  S.  S.  "Deutscher  Kaiser,"  Dr.  Krauth 
reading  aloud  the  "Legends  of  the  Rhine,"  as  they 
passed  the  enchanting  scenes  along  the  river.  In  Mayence 
a  genuine  surprise  awaited  the  travelers  on  coming  down 
to  breakfast  in  their  hotel,  which  we  relate  in  Dr.  Fry's 
own  words :  "During  the  night  Mr.  J.  W.  B.  Dobler,  of 
New  York,  with  his  son  and  daughter,  had  arrived  at 
our  hotel,  and  had  left  word  for  us  to  breakfast  with 
them.  He  had  left  New  York  shortly  after  we  sailed 
from  Philadelphia,  and  had  been  visiting  Scotland  and 
England,  and  after  crossing  to  the  Continent  came  upon 
our  trail  at  Cologne  in  rather  a  curious  way.  Entering 
a  store  to  purchase  some  photographs  he  discovered  a 
package  with  Dr.  Krauth's  address  in  the  Doctor's  own 
handwriting,  and  on  inquiring  ascertained  that  the 
Doctor  had  been  in  the  same  store  but  two  days 
previously.  Pushing  on  he  overtook  us  at  Mayence  just 
in  time  before  we  started  for  Frankfurt  a.  M.  Like 
cold  waters  to  a  thirsty  soul  is  it,  to  meet  friends  in  a 
foreign  land.  After  breakfast  we  strolled  together 
through  the  Cathedral  and  other  interesting  places  until 
eleven  o'clock  when  we  parted, — he  to  take  his  children 
to  Esslingen  to  complete  their  education,  and  we  for 
Frankfurt."  Having  spent  their  Sunday  in  Frankfurt 
they  proceeded  to  Worms,  Speyer,  Heidelberg  and  Stutt- 
gart. From  there  Dr.  Krauth  paid  a  visit  to  the  Spaeth 
family  in  Esslingen,  and  continued  his  journey  to  Ulm, 
Constance,  Lindau  on  the  Lake  of  Constance,  Munich, 
Augsburg,  Nuernberg,  where  he  made  a  stay  of  four 
days.     Then  the  start  was  made  for  the  Luther  places 


i88o.]  THE  STRAIN   OF  SIGHT-SEEING.  367 

proper,  Coburg,  Schmalkalden,  Moelira,  Eisenach 
(Wartburg),  Erfurt,  Leipzig.  The  University  vacation 
having  then  just  commenced  they  missed  Luthardt, 
Dehtzsch.  Kahnis,  Ahlfeld  and  other  prominent  men 
whom  they  would  have  hked  to  meet.  From  Leipzig  the 
journey  was  continued  to  Jena,  Halle,  Eisleben,  Mans- 
feld,  Magdeburg,  Wittenberg,  Dresden  and  Berlin. 
Their  seaport,  Antwerp,  was  reached  on  September  i8th, 
and  a  whole  week  was  given  there  to  a  much  needed 
rest,  after  the  fatigue  and  exertions  of  their  hurried 
trip.  Dr.  Krauth  had,  by  this  time,  discovered  "that  a 
very  large  part  of  his  mission  to  Germany  would  be 
omission."  And  Dr.  Fry  sums  up  their  experience  in 
these  words :  "Not  only  have  we  found  a  want  of  time 
to  see  all  w^e  desired  and  had  noted  down,  but  also  a 
want  of  strength  wdierewith  to  do  it.  The  strain  on 
muscle,  heart  and  brain,  in  constant  sight-seeing,  espec- 
ially such  scenes  as  Europe  presents  to  the  American 
traveller,  is  enormous.  When  our  voyage  commenced  I 
congratulated  myself,  that  for  the  first  time  in  an  un- 
usually busy  ministry  of  twenty-six  years  I  was  about 
to  have  an  extended  period  of  rest.  But,  alas.  I  have 
never  known  a  month  of  more  weariness  and  exhaustion 
than  that  of  July  just  past.  Yet,  if  change  of  occupa- 
tion be  rest,  both  of  us  have  found  it.  It  has  been  so  far 
a  complete  revolution  of  duties,  habits  and  customs  of 
life,  and  therefore  has  about  it  a  life-renewing  novelty 
and  charm,  in  spite  of  all  its  weariness  and  fatigue." 

September  25th  they  embarked  on  the  S.  S.  ''Belgen- 
land"  and  arrived  in  Philadelphia  on  Thursday,  October 
7th.  Five  days  afterwards,  in  a  quiet  little  family  circle 
at  "Cranford  Cottage,"  Dr.  Krauth  performed  the  mar- 
riage service  that  united  his  daughter  Harriett  to  his 
colleague  in  the  Seminary  faculty,  Dr.  A.  Spaeth. 


368  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIII. 

LETTERS   FROM    ABROAD. 

C.    P.    K.    TO    HIS  DAUGHTER. 

Imperial  Hotel,  Cork,  Ireland,  July  7,  1880. 
My  Dear  Daughter: — 

The  Imperial  Hotel  is  rising  and  falling.  The  side- 
walks are  rolling  over  each  other  and  this  note-paper 
glimmers  and  swims  away — but  I  must  nevertheless, 
amid  this  wild  disturbance  in  all  the  settled  forms  of 
nature,  drop  you  a  line  on  this  night,  the  first  in  this 
new  old  world. 

Before  I  was  out  of  bed  this  morning  I  composed 
certain  conjectural  lines  which  have  been  verified 
already — as  thus  : 

O  yes,  we  have  heard  of  Kate  Kearney 

In  the  land  of  potatoes  and  blarney, 

Where  the  rain  from  the  sky 

Never  lets  you  get  dry, 

But  adds  to  the  lakes  of  Killarney. 

To-morrow,  July  8th,  we  start  for  Killarney,  Friday 
(night)  we  shall  hope  to  reach  Dublin;  Saturday,  the 
tenth,  we  shall  possibly  cross  to  England  and  may  spend 
Sunday  at  Chester,  in  which  case  we  will  probably  hear 
your  friend  Dean  Howson  in  his  own  pulpit. 

I  think  this  first  day  has  given  me  a  taste  of  the  enjoy- 
ment and  annoyances  of  travel.  Dr.  Fry  has  been  a  very 
nice  companion,  and  I  am  very  glad  he  is  with  me.  Each 
of  us  has  the  sort  of  knowledge  and  turn  which  the 
other  needs. 

We  shall  hardly  get  to  Paris  before  week  after  next, 
and  until  then  I  must  remain  ignorant  of  matters  at  home. 
God  grant  that  all  the  tidings  may  be  cheerful,  and  that 
nothing  may  obstruct  a  happy  journey  and  safe  return. 

Dublin,  July  9,  1880. 

Reached  Dublin  at  five  P.  M.  and  took  a  drive  to  the 
points  we   were   most   anxious  to   see.     We  made  our 


I 


i88o.]  IRELAND  AND  ENGLAND.  369 

longest  stay  at  St.  Patrick's  Cathedral,  especially 
anxious  to  see  the  places  associated  both  in  life  and  death 
with  Swift  and  Stella.  The  white  haired  old  verger,  or 
whatever  they  call  him,  who  took  us  around,  held  up  his 
hands  at  some  remark  of  mine  and  said :  "The  enthusi- 
asm of  the  Americans  is  wonderful.  They  know  more 
of  the  old  Dean  of  St.  Patrick's  than  the  Irish  do." 
When  he  pointed  to  the  spot  beneath  which  the  bones  of 
Swift  and  Stella  lie.  and  I  asked  him:  "On  which  side 
of  Stella  does  the  Dean  lie?"  the  old  man  with  his  black 
skullcap  and  his  venerable  thin  face,  looking  reverend 
enough  to  be  a  Bishop,  seemed  to  be  utterly  discom- 
fitted. 

Chester,  July  11,  1880. 

We  had  a  fine  boat,  and  although  it  was  raining  part 
of  the  time,  I  had  nothing  to  mar  the  crossing  from  Dub- 
lin to  Wales.  Everywhere  we  find  the  people  full  of 
warmheartedness  toward  Americans,  even  our  defects 
being  considered  as  specially  fresh  and  jolly.  So  far 
from  any  repulsion  being  shown,  they  make  advances 
to  us.  As  we  swept  along  in  the  trains,  the  seaside  being 
to  our  left,  we  saw  several  of  the  summer  resorts,  the 
children  digging  and  wading,  and  everything  reproducing 
itself  as  Leech  and  Du  Maurier  love  to  picture  it.  Punch 
has  been  the  best  of  all  preparations  for  visiting  England. 
We  reached  Chester  at  five.  To-day  we  had  a  grand 
treat.  We  went  to  the  magnificent  Cathedral  of  Chester, 
heard  with  deepest  emotion  and  pleasure  the  first  service 
in  which  we  have  participated  in  England.  I  sent  my 
card  with  a  few  words  to  Dean  Howson,  and  received  a 
message  from  him  that  he  desired  to  see  me.  After 
service  he  was  waiting  for  us  in  the  Chapter,  still  wearing 
his  official  dress.  He  received  me  most  cordially,  invited 
us  to  breakfast  to-morrow  morning,  an  invitation  which 
I  declined,  as  I  start  for  Edinburgh.  I  cannot  convey 
to  you  the  solemn  and  happy  impressions  the  journey  is 
making  upon  me.  If  I  could  only  have  the  enjoyments 
and  benefits  of  this  week  as  the  fruits  of  my  coming,  I 
24 


370  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIII. 

should  feel  that  my  voyage  had  not  been  in  vain.  By 
Wednesday  I  expect  to  be  in  London,  perhaps  by  Satur- 
day in  Paris. 

To  Dr.  a.  Spaeth. 

RosLYN  Inn,  Scotland,  July  13,  1880. 

My  Dear  Doctor  Spaeth  : 

I  feel  that  a  letter  to  you  from  this  region  is  especially 
the  proper  thing,  since  to  you  I  owe  the  fixed  purpose  to 
come  to  Edinburgh,  and  now  that  I  have  been  in  Edin- 
burgh I  realize  that  to  have  missed  coming  would  have 
been  to  lose  one  of  the  supremest  enjoyments  of  my 
trip.  I  am  struck  from  the  beginning  with  the  general 
kindliness  of  the  Scotch,  their  courtesy  and  reliableness. 
Everywhere  names,  sights  and  sounds  reminded  me  that 
I  was  among  a  noble  race,  which  retains  its  individuality 
through  all  the  political  combinations  and  changes.  Edin- 
burgh is  a  pure  diamond.  Other  great  cities  are  mix- 
tures of  jewels  of  the  first  water,  and  jewels  of  no  water 
at  all.  But  Edinburgh  is  so  complete,  makes  a  unique 
impression,  blends  and  harmonizes  so  many  beauties  and 
glories,  and  makes  the  old  and  the  new  relieve  each  other — 
the  old,  old  history  and  the  living  present  kiss  each  other 
there.  I  think  it  quite  impossible  that  I  should  have  had 
a  greater  delight  than  I  have  had  here.  The  number  of 
good  book  stores  testifies  to  the  literary  character  of  the 
people.  The  statues  which  are  so  numerous  show  their 
appreciation  of  their  great  men.  But  their  statues  of  a 
national  character  prove  that  they  are  not  narrow.  The 
monument  to  Prince  Albert  is  the  most  touching  memo- 
rial I  have  ever  seen.  It  is  noble  in  itself.  But  as  a 
tribute  to  greatness  whose  heart  was  goodness,  it  is  ex- 
quisite. To-day  I  came  to  Roslyn  Chapel  and  Castle, 
the  rain  pouring,  but  I  am  so  full  of  delight  that  I  shed 
rain  like  a  duck.  I  feel  my  youth  renewed.  I  think  I 
feel  about  as  Methusalah  felt  when  he  was  eight  years 
old,  going  on  nine. 


i88o.]  THE  BEAUTY  OF  EDINBURGH.  371 

TO    HIS   DAUGHTER. 

Paris,  July  20,  1880. 

In  the  evening,  July  11,  we  again  went  to  the  Cathe- 
dral at  Dean  Howson's  suggestion,  in  preference  to  the 
afternoon.  The  service  was  of  a  more  popular  char- 
acter, chiefly  in  the  number  of  hymns  that  were  sung, 
and  the  audience  was  very  large.  The  sermon  was 
preached  by  Mr.  C.  After  service  Dean  Howson  again 
took  us  in  charge. 

In  the  evening  we  walked  through  the  strange  two- 
story  side  street  called  "  The  Rows."  We  soon  were 
glad  to  leave  them,  as  they  were  filled  with  a  crowd  of 
people  of  the  lower,  and  some  of  them  of  the  baser,  sort. 
There  was  a  degree  of  roughness  and  coarseness  sur- 
passing anything  we  are  likely  to  see  in  a  place  of  equal 
publicity  and  respectability  in  America.  We  made  a 
complete  circuit  of  the  walls.  Such  quaintness,  such 
oddity,  such  historic  suggestions  as  were  blended  at  every 
point,  made  it  novel  and  enchanting  to  us  beyond  expres- 
sion. 

On  Monday,  July  12,  Doctor  Fry  and  I  parted  to  meet 
in  London  on  Wednesday,  July  14.  I  went  to  Edin- 
burgh. My  impressions  of  that  city  I  have  given  in  a 
letter  to  Doctor  Spaeth  from  the  old  Roslyn  Inn,  near 
Roslyn  Chapel  and  Castle.  Edinburgh  in  its  totality  is 
like  a  consummate  work,  in  which  one  artistic  mind  has 
availed  itself  of  all  the  natural  beauties  and  grandeur  of 
the  location,  has  excluded  all  disharmonies,  and  has  asso- 
ciated the  scenes  of  history  with  places  worthy  of  them. 

We  saw  the  bathing  machines ;  the  operations  of  agri- 
culture and  gardening,  the  harvesting  and  hay-making, 
the  lovely  gardens;  the  sheep  with  their  shepherds  and 
sagacious  dogs.  In  the  parks  we  saw  lawn  tennis ;  in 
the  meadows  cricket.  Everywhere  some  poetical  phrase 
received  an  interpretation  which  vivified  it.  You  must 
go  through  a  great  English  Cathedral  to  appreciate  fullv 
Milton's  epithet,  "Cloistered,"  in  II  Penseroso.     I  have 


3/2  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIII. 

dearly  loved  our  English  poets,  but  I  know  now  that  a 
visit  to  Great  Britain  is  needed  for  a  perfect  appreciation 
of  them.  On  Wednesday  I  left  Edinburgh.  Our  route 
took  us  through  Newcastle-on-Tyne,  to  which  coals  need 
not  be  carried.  I  saw  the  glorious  old  Cathedral  at 
Durham,  the  grand  Muenster  at  York;  we  passed  in 
sight  of  the  Cathedral  of  Peterboro,  with  its  enchanting 
surroundings.  There  the  headless  body  of  Mary  Queen 
of  Scots  was  laid  in  the  grave. 

In  the  evening  I  reached  London,  and  found  that  Dr. 
Fry  had  been  at  the  Inns-of-Court  Hotel  for  a  day. 
Thursday,  July  15,  we  visited  the  British  Museum, 
Regent  Park  and  the  Zoological  Gardens,  and  from  the 
tops  of  the  omnibusses  took  general  views  of  London. 
Friday,  July  16,  we  visited  St.  Paul's,  and  before  we 
began  our  explorations,  heard  the  choral  service  as  it 
pealed  and  ebbed  along  the  lofty  arches  of  the  nave. 
We  then  went  to  the  Tower,  the  saddest  place  I  have  ever 
seen.  Later  in  the  day  we  visited  the  Albert  Memorial, 
erected  by  the  Queen  "and  her  people."  It  is  very 
grand,  but  did  not  touch  me  as  much  as  the  memorial 
statue  of  the  Prince  at  Edinburgh.  Saturday,  July  17, 
we  saw  the  Parliament  buildings  and  Westminster  Abbey. 
If  I  could  see  but  one  thing  in  London  it  would  be  the 
Abbey  I  should  choose,  and  next  to  it  the  Tower. 

On  Sunday,  July  18,  we  attended  service  at  St.  Paul's, 
which  did  not  impress  me  as  much  as  the  service  at 
Chester.  The  sermon,  though  not  a  strong  one,  was 
better  than  either  of  the  Chester  sermons.  The  tone  of 
Cathedral  preaching  as  we  have  heard  it  is  lifeless,  moral- 
istic and  some  of  it  rationalistic.  The  Church  of  Eng- 
land must  be  revolutionized,  or  must  continue  to  lose  its 
hold  on  the  masses. 

Nuernberg,  August  15,  1880. 

....  I  have  been  in  this  quaint,  fascinating  old  city 
about  four  days,  wandering  around  nearly  all  the  time 
alone,  coming  on  surprises  and  finding  things  for  myself. 
I  visited  the  house  where  Hans  Sachs  lived,  a  broad 


i88o.]  NUERNBERG  AND  HANS  SACHS.  373 

building  of  four  stories,  with  sharp  high-tilted  roof,  in  a 
street  which  we  would  consider  narrow  for  an  alley.  The 
house  bears  on  it  a  tablet  with  an  inscription  giving  the 
date  of  his  birth  and  of  his  death.  The  guild  of  shoe- 
makers is  still  in  no  inconsiderable  force  in  the  old  neigh- 
borhood. By  his  house  is  a  workshop,  with  a  life-size 
portrait  of  him  in  oil,  well  painted.  I  then  wandered  to 
the  Platz,  where  his  monument  stands.  It  is  very  fine. 
He  sits  with  his  leather  apron  on,  the  folds  of  his  dress 
partly  hide  a  number  of  books  which  are  about  him;  his 
writing  paper  is  held  in  one  hand  over  the  back  of  a  book, 
and  in  his  other  hand  he  holds  a  pencil  as  if  just  struck 
with  a  thought,  and  about  to  commit  it  to  writing.  He 
wears  the  cute,  sweet,  nice  look  which  belongs  to  him. 
The  little  garden-like  enclosure  around  the  monument  is 
filled  with  little  rosebushes,  all  of  which  were  in  full 
bloom.  ...  As  I  walked  around  the  monument,  turning 
my  eyes  to  it  from  the  various  points  of  view,  a  boy 
passing  with  a  bundle  had  his  curiosity  excited  by  wit- 
nessing mine,  and  laying  his  bundle  on  the  top  rail  stood 
leaning  on  his  elbows  gazing  at  the  statue.  When  I 
reached  him  I  leaned  with  my  elbow  near  his  and  said : 
"  Wissen  Sie,  wer  Hans  Sachs  war?"  He  said  with  a 
startled  air :  "  Nein !"  Then,  w^ith  deep  solemnity,  I 
said : 

"  Hans  Sachs  war  ein  Schuh- 
Macher  und  Poet  dazu." 

and  walked  slowly  away,  the  boy  now  alternating  his 
gaze  between  Hans  Sachs  and  myself. 

This  afternoon  I  took  a  long  walk  by  a  new  route 
along  the  river  Pegnitz,  which  I  have  been  studying  from 
every  point  of  view.  I  extended  my  walk  to  the  St. 
Johannis-Kirchhof,  the  ancient  and  marvelously  rich 
burying  ground  of  the  city.  Used  for  centuries,  it  is,  of 
course,  crowded  in  every  part.  Securing  the  aid  of  the 
janitress,  I  visited  the  most  interesting  points — the  Sta- 
tions, the  grave  of  Kraft.  Behaim,  Pirkheimer  and  Al- 
brecht  Duerer.     But  these  left  unseen  the  grave  I  most 


374  CHARLES  PORT  ERF  I  ELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIII. 

wished  to  see.  At  last  I  stood  by  the  resting  place  of  the 
grand  old  Meistersinger.  I  asked  the  woman  in  the 
worst  German  probably  that  has  ever  been  spoken  since 
the  tongues  were  divided  at  Babel,  if  I  could  get  flowers 
in  the  neighborhood.  The  good  old  soul  understood  me 
and  took  me  outside  of  the  walls  to  a  gardener's.  I 
brought  from  thence  a  bunch  of  rosebuds,  white,  crim- 
son, red  and  pale  pink,  set  round  with  evergreens.  I 
went  back  and  laid  it  reverently  on  the  grey  century-worn 
stone  at  the  base  of  the  inscription  in  raised  metal,  and 
said :     "  Fuer  meine  Tochter."* 

TO    HIS   DAUGHTER. 

Berlin,  September  12,  1880. 

My  visit  to  Dresden  was  pleasant,  though  I  was  too 
weak  to  attempt  to  see  much.  My  weakness  is  not  all 
the  result  of  travel,  but  is  perhaps  partly  connected  with 
the  vitiated  atmospheric  conditions  common  to  nearly  all 
the  German  cities.  I  wonder  that  they  are  not  swept  out 
of  existence  by  typhus  fever.  ...  I  am  satisfied  without 
knowing  what  the  medical  theory  is,  that  the  Pest  or 
Plague  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  Typhus.  At  Witten- 
berg I  ceased  to  wonder  that  the  pest  had  dispersed  the 
University  more  than  once.  The  stagnant  pools  around 
it  are  frightful.  ...  So  far  as  I  could  note,  Dresden 
seemed  to  me  exceptionally  clean  and  wholesome.  .  .  . 
My  days  are  rapidly  drawing  to  their  close.  I  have 
finished  my  Luther  places  and  now,  great  as  my  enjoy- 
ment has  been,  I  sigh  for  home. 

TO   DR.   A.    SPAETH. 

Leipzig,  August  25,  1880. 

....  We  are  enjoying  greatly  our  journey.  I  trust 
that  God  will  permit  me  to  return  with  my  mind  and 
heart  enriched  for  the  work  of  the  future.     I  trust  that 

*  She  was  particularly  interested  in  the  old  Meistersinger  and 
Nuernberg,  his  picturesque  home,  as  she  was  preparing,  at  that  time, 
an  English  translation  of  Wildenhahn's  Hans  Sachs. 


i88o.]  AUGSBURG  AND  COBURG.  375 

the  beloved  brethren  of  the  Seminary  will  kindly  bear 
the  increased  burden  connected  with  my  absence  until 
October.  Remember  me  to  them  in  much  love  when 
you  see  them. 

TO   HIS  DAUGHTER. 

Antwerp,  September  21,  1880. 

Expect  to  sail  on  Saturday.  The  probabilities  are  that 
we  shall  have  some  rough  weather,  but  I  have  no  fears 
or  anxieties. 

C.    P.    K.    TO    DR.    H.    E.    JACOBS. 

CoBURG,  Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha,  August  17,  1880. 

My  Dear  Friend  and  Brother: 

There  are  not  many  days  in  which  you  do  not  come 
into  my  thoughts,  but  you  have  been  specially  in  them 
since  I  have,  in  person,  been  following  the  line  of  travel 
in  which  my  studies  moved  for  so  long  a  time,  when 
your  sympathy  and  co-operation  were  so  precious  and 
valuable  to  me.  August  1 1  I  was  in  Augsburg.  I  saw 
the  mighty  Dome  in  whose  shadow,  and  within  whose 
walls,  so  many  of  the  movements  of  the  Diet  took  place. 
I  entered  the  "Chapel-Room"  of  the  old  Bishop's  palace, 
in  which  the  Confession  was  read.  From  Augsburg  I 
went  to  Nuernberg,  that  quaint  enchanting  old  city,  and 
there  I  lingered  for  four  days.  Yesterday  we  started  for 
Coburg.  The  town  itself  is  not  without  interest  to  the 
pilgrim  of  our  Church.  In  the  Moritzkirche  Luther 
preached  more  than  once  in  1530,  and  in  it  is  buried  John 
Casimir.  Among  its  preachers  were  Justus  Jonas  and 
John  Gerhard.  In  its  Gymnasium  John  Gerhard  lec- 
tured, and  Buddeus  and  Cyprian  were  teachers.  Among 
its  pupils  was  Seckendorf,  in  his  schooldays  here  a  page 
of  Duke  Ernst  the  Pious.  But  the  grand  interest  of  the 
place  centres,  of  course,  in  the  "feste  Burg,"  which  God 
gave  to  Luther  in  the  grand  old  Veste  Coburg.  Long 
before  we  reached  the  town  the  glorious  massive  fortress 
lifted  its  walls  in  our  sight.     We  climbed  part  of  the  way 


376  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIII. 

and  then  were  glad  to  take  a  carriage.  The  forest  as 
you  rise  still  lies  wild  beneath  you,  though  with  many 
traces  of  pruning  and  care  which  do  not  belong  to  Luth- 
er's time.  In  many  places  the  hill-side  almost  ceases  to 
slope,  and  the  descent  is  sheer.  It  is  little  wonder  that 
such  a  fortress,  with  the  soldiers  of  Gustavus  Adolphus 
to  hold  it,  was  assailed  in  vain  by  Wallenstein.  The 
chambers  of  Luther  are  substantially  as  when  he  occu- 
pied them — his  sitting  room  and  his  bed-room.  The 
furtive  knives  of  relic-mongers  have  left  a  large  part  of 
Luther's  bedstead  and  of  his  chair.  On  the  sitting-room 
table  is  a  bust  of  Luther,  his  cup,  various  things  carved 
from  Luther's  beech-tree,  and  on  the  shelves  editions  of 
his  writings,  from  the  oldest  to  the  Erlangen  inclusive. 
In  the  Gewehrsaal,  in  addition  to  the  collection  of  fire- 
arms, are  portraits,  full  length,  among  which  are  Gus- 
tavus Adolphus,  Wallenstein  and  Tilly.  The  Reforma- 
tion room,  next  to  Luther's  chambers,  interested  and 
delighted  us.  .  .  .  The  outlook  from  the  walls  of  the 
fortress  is  beautiful  beyond  description,  and  Luther  with 
his  passionate  love  of  nature  enjoyed  it  to  the  full,  when 
his  heart  was  not  overwhelmed  with  anxiety  for  the 
Church.  The  thickets  of  which  he  writes  so  often  as  the 
harbouring  places  of  birds,  are  not  entirely  gone,  but  as 
the  noisy  host  of  the  Diet  to  which  he  delighted  in  com- 
paring them,  sleeps  in  dust,  so  their  feathered  repre- 
presentatives  seem  to  have  vanished.  The  "Dohlen.  nnd 
Kroehcn"  seem  to  hold  their  Diets  no  more.  We  saw 
nothing  of  the  "  Zu-ii.-Ah-Reiten,"  we  heard  nothing  of 
the  "Geschrei  Tag  unci  Nacht  ohne  Aufhoeren,  als  waeren 
sie  alle  trunken,  voll  imd  toll."  After  wandering  around 
upon  the  walls,  we  wandered  about  the  Castle  below — 
the  twilight  gave  us  privacy,  and  I  sang:  "Ein  feste 
Burg" — not  by  note.  Luther  says  of  his  time  at  Coburg 
that  he  was  treated  as  a  prince.  He  had,  we  know, 
access  to  every  part  of  the  grounds,  and  the  keys  to  all 
the  chambers.  Never  in  the  life  of  the  theologian,  per- 
haps, has  the  reality  had  such  a  charm  of  romance,  such 
a  magic  of  poetry  as  in  Luther's.     His  majestic  life  had 


i88o.]  THE  BIOGRAPHY  BEGUN.  377 

a  setting  not  unworthy  of  it.  His  surroundings  were 
symbols  of  his  character  and  of  his  work.  No  man  can 
feel  Luther's  life,  still  less  write  it,  who  does  not  know 
where  he  was,  as  well  as  what  he  was. 

Believe  me  ever  your  devoted  and  grateful  friend, 

C.  P.  K. 

WORK  ON   THE  LUTHER  BIOGRAPHY. 

After  his  return  from  Europe  Dr.  Krauth  lost  no  time 
in  taking  up  the  work  on  the  Luther-Biography.     He  had 
been  an  indefatigable,  systematic  worker  all  through  his 
life.     But  the  amount  of  work  accomplished  by  him  on 
the  Luther-Biography,  in  the  comparatively  brief  period 
of  a  few  months,  is  truly  amazing,  when  we  remember 
that,  even  before  he  embarked  for  Europe,  that  insidious 
disease,  which  finally  carried  him  off,  had  begun  to  under- 
mine his  vitality,  so  that  he  complained  in  his  private 
correspondence  of  a  feeling  of  "good-for-nothingness," 
which  was  quite  uncommon  with  him.     It  is  manifest 
that  he  threw  himself  into  the  work  with  a  fervor  and 
enthusiasm  worthy  of  his  best  days.     On  April  22,  1881, 
a  little  more  than  six  months  after  his  return,  he  deliv- 
ered a  lecture  on  "  Luther  and  Luther's  Germany  "  in 
tlie  Young  Men's  Christian  Association  Hall,  Philadel- 
phia,   for  the  benefit   of   his    former  congregation,    St. 
Stephen's,  in  West  Philadelphia.     This  lecture  embodied 
the  results  of  his  studies  on  Luther,  carried  on  for  many 
years ;  it  reflected  the  glow  of  inspiration  which  his  visit 
to  the  Luther-lands  had  kindled  in  his  soul;  and,  at  the 
same  time,  it  was  a  surprising  testimony  of  the  actual 
amount  of  labor  performed   in  the  preparation  of  his 
Luther-Biography.     For  that  lecture  consisted  chiefly  in 
extracts    from   a   manuscript   of   more   than  400   pages 
written  in  his  own  hand,  and  covering  the  life  of  Luther 
up  to  the  Diet  of  Worms  in  152 1.     In  some  sections  it  is 
only  an  outline  or  framework,  which  he  evidently  in- 


378  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIII. 

tended  to  fill  out  at  a  later  time.  But  most  of  it  presents 
a  continuous  narrative  of  Luther's  Life  up  to  that  time, 
together  with  a  detailed  statement  of  the  literary  ma- 
terial to  which  he  had  reference,  particularly  the  passages 
in  the  different  editions  of  Luther's  works. 

We  present  a  few  extracts  from  the  introductory  part 
of  his  manuscript,  to  give  to  our  readers  an  idea  of  what 
this  biography  would  have  been,  if  he  had  been  per- 
mitted to  complete  it. 

Luther's  Germany. 

Germany  is  one  vast  Mausoleum.  Its  dust  is  made  of 
the  forms  of  the  mighty.  Their  graves  lie  thick  in  the 
old  church-yards.  The  pilgrim  moves  among  the  dead 
for  weeks  together,  and  as  he  lingers  among  the  tokens 
of  the  mortality  of  ages,  with  the  bones  of  the  great  men 
of  the  eras  at  his  feet,  as  generation  after  generation 
rises  and  passes  and  fades  from  his  view,  an  indescrib- 
able solemnity  comes  over  him.  The  world  of  the  dead 
seems  the  real  world.  The  living  seem  but  a  little  rem- 
nant shut  out  of  that  true  world.  We  who  are  among 
the  petty  cares  and  strifes  of  the  hour,  are  like  a  weak 
wild  host,  which  clamours  around  the  great,  closed  gate 
of  a  grand  city,  into  which  a  procession  has  passed  so 
deeply,  that  the  sound  of  its  music  grows  faint  upon  our 
ear.  Our  life,  as  we  call  it,  seems  so  dead,  and  the  living 
life  seems  all  beyond — the  happy  life  among  the  dead 
who  live  forever — the  faithful  and  the  true,  faithful  to 
the  truth  and  true  to  the  faith. 

Germany  is  the  central  bond  of  Europe.  It  is  the  key- 
stone of  the  grand  arch  of  politics  and  histories  in  the 
modern  world.  The  old  writers  call  it  "  the  noble  and 
the  mighty,"  and  its  people  sing  to-day :  "  Deutschland, 
Deutschland  ueber  Alles,  ueber  Alles  in  der  Welt." 
(Germany  over  all,  over  all  in  the  world.)  The  vener- 
able geographer  of  the  sixteenth  century,  Sebastian 
Muenster,  not  satisfied  with  putting  on  his  chart  of  Ger- 
many its  mere  name,  adds :     "  Seat  of  the  Roman  Em- 


i88r.]  EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  BIOGRAPHY.  379 

pire.  Seat  of  all  useful  arts  and  handicrafts.  Spring  of 
new  arts;  Mother  of  Heroes,  sages  and  scholars;  a  pure 
temple  of  the  true  fear  of  God  and  of  all  virtues."  One 
of  her  poets  has  sung: 

Of  all  the  lands  on  eartli  that  be 
The  German  land's  the  land  for  me, 

Whose  dews  are  heaven's  blessing  : 
And  though  nor  gold  nor  jewels  rare, 
Yet  store  of  men  and  maidens  fair 

And  corn  and  wine  possessing. 

(AU.  WiLH.  SCHREIBER,  LONGFELLOW,  tr. ) 

Another  poet  has  answered  the  question :  Whicli  is 
the  German's  Fatherland? 

Far  as  the  German  accent  rings 
And  hymns  to  God  in  heaven  sings 

That  is  the  land, 
There,  brother  is  thy  Fatherland ! 

(E.  M.  Arndt.) 

And  another  poet  has  asked : 

Know  ye  the  land  where  truth  is  told 
Where  word  of  man  is  good  as  gold? 

The  honest  land  where  love  and  truth 

Bloom  on  in  everlasting  youth  ? 
We  know  that  honest  land  full  well, 
'Tis  where  the  free-souled  Germans  dwell. 

This  great  land  sweeps  from  the  Alps  to  the  Northern 
Sea;  great  are  her  rivers,  her  mountains,  her  lakes  and 
resources — but  her  history,  her  people  are  her  glory,  a 
noble  people  patient  in  endurance,  grateful  for  their  gifts 
and  faithful  in  the  use  of  them. 

THUERINGIA. 

In  the  heart  of  Germany  there  lies  a  region  of  wide 
extent,  embracing  smiling  meadows,  flourishing  towns 
and  cities,  rivers  winding  through  deep-cut  valleys  and 
bounded  by  lofty  mountain  ranges.  This  region  is  rich 
in  the  associations  of  romance,  all  shining,  as  in  an  amber 
haze,  with  the  sad  and  soft  light  of  great  historic  memo- 


380  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XVIIL 

ries.  In  the  days  of  old  this  region  was  a  kingdom.  The 
kingdom  has  long  ago  been  swept  away  by  the  ocean  swell 
of  the  surges  of  time — the  land  has  been  divided  and  sub- 
divided, and  the  fragments  of  fragments  have  been  tora 
and  torn  again ;  it  has  been  parcelled  among  many  lords 
and  incorporated  piecemeal  into  many  lands — but  the  old 
name  lives  and  flames  inextinguishably.  It  has  been 
among  lands  like  the  Hebrews  among  the  nations.  You 
must  search  for  it  under  ten  names  in  modern  maps,  if 
you  look  for  it  in  the  states  which  have  its  parts,  but  a 
good  Atlas  will  somewhere  group  them  all,  and  you  will 
find  that  their  name,  its  name,  is  Thiieringia. 

The  Thueringian  region  has  been  pronounced  as  next 
after  the  borders  of  the  Rhine,  the  loveliest  in  Germany. 
Thueringia  is  so  homelike,  meeting  the  wanderer  with  the 
welcome  which  we  expect  from  an  old  dear  friend.  He 
who  approaches  it  from  the  Alpine  regions  finds  in  it 
relief  from  the  power  of  grandeur  which  is  almost  pain. 
The  traveller  who  has  been  jaded  by  the  long  monotonous 
journeyings  over  the  flats  of  Northern  Germany,  finds  his 
heart  beating  with  a  new  life  as  soon  as  he  enters  this 
enchanting  land.  Nature  unfolds  to  him  at  every  step 
new  charms — rich  and  richer,  bold  and  bolder — luxuriant 
wildness  and  lavish  beauty,  picturesqueness  rising  to  sub- 
limity, and  grandeur  softening  away  into  loveliness.  The 
trees  wear  a  more  vivid  green.  Glorious  mountains  form 
the  undulations  of  this  land,  thick  with  impenetrable 
forests,  which  renew  themselves  more  swiftly  than  the 
hand  of  man  destroys  them,  or,  stripped  of  their  trees 
and  refusing  to  be  clothed  again  with  foliage,  are  bleak 
and  glaring.  Her  romantic  meadows  offer  themselves 
for  the  festal  time,  and  bold  rocks  cast  their  gigantic 
shadows,  and  the  colossal  strata  baring  themselves  on  the 
surface,  show  the  bonds  of  the  world  that  is,  to  the  world 
that  faded  out  long  ago. 

The  people  of  this  region  are  simple,  true  and  upright. 
In  the  valleys  and  on  the  mountain-slopes  of  the  Thuerin- 
gian Forest  have  continued  to  dwell  the  ancient  German 
soundness  at  the  core,  the  true-heartedness,  hospitality. 


i88i.]         THUERINGIA,  THE  MEMORABLE  LAND.  381 

purity  of  purpose,  invincible  fidelity  and  trustiness.  The 
dull-eyed  peasant  of  the  German  Low-lands  is  often 
almost  as  passive  and  mute  as  his  cattle — in  Thueringia 
even  the  poorest  cottage  may  know  the  charms  of  music. 
Around  the  sacred  shades  of  these  majestic  forests  still 
wander  the  spirits  of  the  ancient  German  romance :  the 
kindly  old  sages  of  the  times  of  the  fathers  still  live  in 
the  unforgotten  words  which  lie  treasured  on  the  lips  of 
this  people,  and  in  the  home-circles  of  the  peasants  is 
heard  many  a  song  pulsating  with  the  joyous  heart  of 
childhood,  and  worthy  of  a  wider  world.  Here  the  wild 
and  wonderful  realm  of  the  spectre  and  goblin  and  fairy 
is  still  in  power,  and  exercises  a  secret  sway  over  the  souls 
of  men:  for  mountains  will  always  be  the  homes  of  the 
divine  poetical  influences  which  shape  human  character. 
Over  the  whole  land  hovers  the  spirit  of  the  olden  time 
— the  soft  rustling  of  its  wings  not  wholly  sunk  into 
silence.  The  work  of  the  mighty,  who  are  on  earth  no 
more,  is  not  clean  gone.  The  trees  and  the  crags  which 
soar  heavenward  are  its  memorials.  The  very  ruins  of 
castle  and  fortress  strike  us  with  awe.  They  bring  us 
into  the  presence  of  the  heroic  deeds  and  romantic  loves 
of  those,  whose  ashes  rest  scattered  and  cold  through  those 
vales  and  mountains.  "  Many  a  square  mile  of  Thuer- 
ingian  soil,"  says  an  enthusiast,  "  is  worth  more,  is  more 
memorable  than  the  whole  Mark  of  Brandenburg,  with 
Pommerania  thrown  in."  (Friedrich  Gottlob  Wetzel, 
Motto  in  Bechstein's  Wanderungen  durch  Thueringen.) 


NINETEENTH  CHAPTER. 

THE  END. 
1881-1883. 

During  the  last  two  years  of  Dr.  Krauth's  life — we 
may  say  it  without  presumption — his  relations  and  his 
visits  to  the  parsonage  of  St.  Johannis  Church,  Philadel- 
phia (161 5  Girard  Avenue),  were  the  bright  spots  in  a 
period  of  gradual  decline  and  increasing  gloom.  Even 
in  former  years  he  had,  indeed,  been  no  stranger  in  that 
house.  He  loved  to  attend  the  services  of  St.  Johannis 
Church,  which  he  characterized  as  "  the  nearest  approach 
to  the  ideal  of  congregational  worship."  And  he  liked 
to  be  there  not  only  as  a  hearer  and  a  communicant ;  he 
had  the  ambition  also  to  take  a  part  of  the  service  and  ta 
officiate  in  Luther's  language,  reading  the  liturgy  and 
assisting  at  the  administration  of  the  Sacrament  of  the 
Altar.  And  after  these  services  he  used  to  take  dinner 
at  the  parsonage,  and  spend  a  few  hours  in  pleasant  inter- 
course with  its  inmates.  And  when  the  shadow  of  death 
fell  upon  that  house  and,  after  years  of  suffering,  its 
mother  was  taken  away  (December,  1878),  he  was  the 
very  first  to  visit  the  bereaved  family,  to  bring  them  sweet 
words  of  consolation,  and  to  lead  them  in  prayer  to  the 
throne  of  a  living  and  merciful  Saviour. 

But  now.  that  his  own  beloved  daughter  had  taken  her 
place  in  that  household  as  the  second  mother,  he  himself 
joined  its  fellowship  with  all  the  warmth  of  his  sym- 
pathetic, tender  heart.  He  relished — sometimes  with  a 
kind  of  astonished  smile — his  new  dignity  as  "Grand- 
382 


i88i-82.]  iriTH    HIS    GRANDCHILDREN.  383 

father"  of  a  merry  set  of  children,  to  which  he  found 
himself  so  suddenly  promoted.  There  was  no  end  of  fun 
and  mirth  when  he  would  yield  to  their  begging,  and  treat 
them  to  the  most  ludicrous  impromptu  translations  of 
some  English  nursery  rhymes  into  German.  Now  and 
then  he  would  take  the  older  boys  on  a  walk  to  the  little 
brooks  and  ponds  in  the  outskirts  of  the  City,  to  catch 
tadpoles  and  fish,  and  to  gather  plants  for  the  aquarium. 
He  took  the  greatest  pleasure  in  impressing  upon  their 
youthful  minds  a  realization  and  admiration  of  God's 
greatness  and  wisdom  in  the  works  of  nature.  He  would 
show  and  explain  to  them  any  new  features  in  his  own 
beautifully  kept  aquariums,  and  again  inspect  their  col- 
lections with  the  eye  of  a  connoisseur,  to  give  them  the 
benefit  of  his  experience  and  advice. 

In  January,  1882,  about  one  year  before  his  own  death, 
he  stood  with  us  at  the  coffin  of  his  first  grandchild,  the 
only  one  he  lived  to  see,  which  was  taken  from  us  as  a 
babe  of  two  weeks.  His  eyes  filling  with  tears,  he  said : 
"Oh,  what  a  wretched  thing  this  life  would  be,  if  we 
knew  no  living  Saviour  above!"  Thus  he  faithfully 
shared  our  joys  and  sorrows,  our  only  regret  being,  that 
owing  to  his  multifarious  duties  and  his  increasing 
physical  debility,  his  visits  gradually  became  few  and  far 
between.  It  was  difficult  to  realize,  even  then,  that  they 
were,  in  fact,  the  last  golden  rays  of  a  setting  sun.  "  My 
overworked  life  has  been  in  a  sort  of  crisis  all  this  winter. 
Sometimes  I  have  been  obliged  to  take  food  to  the  Uni- 
versity with  me,  and  once  or  twice  I  had  to  eat  on  the  side 
streets.  Even  my  after-supper-time,  of  which  I  am  so 
jealous,  has  been  broken  into."  (Letter  to  his  daughter, 
January  4,  1881.) 

In  the  summer  of  i88t  he  sought  recreation  in  a  trip 
to  the  Delaware  Water  Gap.  St.  Lawrence  River.  Mon- 
treal. Quebec,  the  White  Mountains  and  Boston.  In  the 
following  year  he  spent  his  summer  at  Mount  Desert, 


384  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIX. 

Bar  Harbor,  Maine.  On  the  way  he  visited  his  son 
Charles  at  Sommerville,  near  Boston,  and  after  his  return 
he  paid  a  flying  visit  to  his  daughter  at  Cape  May  Point, 
N.  J.     He  writes  from  Bar  Harbor  to  Mrs.  Spaeth : 

July  12,  1882. 
I  stopped  at  Portland,  Bath  and  Rockland,  enjoying  the 
scenery  very  greatly.  The  sail  from  Rockland  to  Bar 
Harbor  was  very  delightful.  We  had  a  clear  calm  day. 
The  shores  and  islands  were  in  sight  all  the  time,  and 
although  we  encountered  some  ocean  swell,  I  was  not  in 
the  least  sick.  I  arrived  in  Bar  Harbor  last  Saturday 
week  about  3  P.  M.  Professor  W.,  Mrs.,  Miss  and  Miss 
B.  W.  gave  me  a  very  cordial  reception,  and  I  soon  felt 
myself  quite  at  home.  I  have  a  comfortable  room.  The 
hotel  is  plain,  substantial  and  free  from  restraint.  The 
company  is  a  very  agreeable  one,  and  I  have  been  intro- 
duced to  all  the  nice  people.  The  island  fully  sustains 
the  impression  made  by  descriptions  in  books  and  by 
friends.  There  is  scarcely  an  element  of  beauty  and 
sublimity  which  is  not  to  be  found  here.  Rugged  moun- 
tains, the  Bay,  the  Fjord,  the  open  sea,  lakes,  streams, 
forests  ofifer  themselves  to  the  eye.  The  drives  are 
many  and  varied;  the  sea-side  objects  are  very  rich,  and 
the  botany  of  the  island  is  attractive.  The  temperature 
is  always  cool  in  the  shade:  even  in  the  hottest  days  you 
will  not  suffer  unless  you  walk  in  the  direct  rays  of  the 
sun.  As  to  my  health,  I  can  hardly  make  a  definite 
report.  I  think  I  am  safe  in  saying  that  I  have  not  lost 
anything;  I  have  escaped  the  exhaustive  heat  of  the  City 
and  have  not  had  a  single  attack  of  the  prostration  which 
came  to  me  daily  at  home.  I  am  well  enough  to  partici- 
pate in  a  quiet  way  in  the  enjoyments  which  offer  them- 
selves here.     I  am  very  glad  that  I  came. 

It  was  during  these  last  two  summer-journeys  to  the 
North  and  East  that  he  penned  his  "Cosmos"  and 
"Microcosmos" — which  we  might  properly  call  his 
"Nunc  Dimittis"  to  this  "bonnie  world." 


COSMOS. 

IN    THE    RHYMES    OF    A    SUMMER    HOLIDAY    JOURNEY. 


LOVE  NOT  THE  WORLD. 

1  John  ii.  15. 

Dxus  Cheat  kt  Cokskrvat  Nati-ram— Causa  Peccati  Est  Voluntas  Malobi'm 
[Ood  creates  and  conserves  nature— the  cause  of  sin  is  the  will  of  the  evil.] 

Confessio  Augustana,  Art.  XIX. 


I. 

What  is  that  we  may  not  love? 

Not  the  world  our  God  has  made, 
All  the  power  and  goodness  there 

By  His  lavish  hand  displayed. 


Lovely  are  her  crystal  streams, 

Lovely  are  her  valleys  wide. 
Glorious  are  her  mountain  heights. 

And  her  pulsing  ocean  side. 

3. 
Firmamental  soar  her  trees, 

Sweetly  bloom  her  lowly  flowers; 
Twining  in  the  solar  hand, 

Weave  the  chaplets  of  the  hours. 

4- 
Lithesome  boughs  sway  to  the  breeze. 

Gauntly  bow   the  whispering  pines, 
Wind-waves  quiver  through  the  corn. 

Into  beauty's  boundless  lines. 

5- 
Priestesses  in  fragrant  robes, 
Alchemists  of  nature  stand, 
Earth  to  subtlest  air  transmute, 
Swinging  sweetness  o'er  the  land. 
»5  385 


386       CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Cha^.XIX. 

6. 

Quiet  lakes,  mid  bending  hills, 

Circling  isles  of  greenery, 
Bound  in  mirrors  doubling  realms. 

Cloud  and   rocks  and   fringing  tree. 

7. 
Brooks  through  shadows  glinting  swift. 

Leap  to  snow  in  wild  cascades. 
Then  in  hushing  murmurs  glide. 

Slanting  by  the  humming  glades. 


From  the  lowlands  to  the  fells 
Music  fills  the  happy  air, 

All  the  plentitude  of  song. 

Plea  and  love  and  joy,  is  there. 


Nature  lifts  herself  to  art, 
In  her  darling  infant,  man, 

All  the  grand  and  beauteous  grasps 
In  his  tiny  fingers'   span. 

10. 

Genius,  with  transfigured  light. 
Makes   the  paltry   canvas  glow, 

Chilly  walls  leap  into  flame 
With  the  glories  of  the  bow. 

II. 

Bronze  and  marble  palpitate 
With  a  hidden  human  heart. 

And  the  warmer  throbs  of  life 
Force  their  rigid  lips  to  part. 


Discords  pitch  her  harmonies 
To  a  tone  more  wildly  sweet, 

And  the  low,  deep  notes  that  jar 
Make  her  scale  of  praise  complete. 


5 1.]  COSMOS.  387 

13- 

Boundless  life  asks  boundless  death, 

Powers  of  growtli  need  powers  that  quell, 

Nature's  war  is  nature's  peace, 
And  her  balance,  ill  with  ill. 

14. 

For  her  ills  are  secret  good. 

All  her  pangs  are  hidden  balm. 
Sorrow  ripens  to  her  joy. 

And  her  tempests  guard  her  calm. 

15- 

Spotless  nature  cannot  err. 

Docile  in  divine  control, 
Evil   dwells  alone  in  will. 

Guilt  in  conscience,  crime  in  soul. 

16. 

Flames  that  lap  the  martyr's  pyre, 

Floods  that  drown  the  innocent. 
Storms  with  wide-spread  rage  and  wrack 

Move  within  their  Lord's  intent. 

17. 
By  His  law  the  fire  consumes. 

By  His  law  the  torrents  roar. 
Earthquakes  heave,  and  rend  the  land. 

And  the  waves  o'erwhelm  the  shore. 

18. 

All  of  nature  God  creates, 

All  of  nature  God  conserves, 
Nestling  in  His  mighty  hand. 

Never  from  its  purpose  swerves. 

19- 

Not  in  fiame,  or  flood,  or  storm. 

Lies  the  horror,  lies  the  sin, 
Bent  and  forced  is  that  without 

By  the  stress  of  hell  within. 


388  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chav.XJX. 


Dark  in  freedom,  shade  of  God, 
Finite  will,  o'er  nature's  powers — 

Self-impelling,  self-impelled — 
In  its  gloomy  grandeur  towers. 


Will  of  evil,  evil  makes, 
Will  defiant  in  offense. 

By  the  sufferance  of  its  God, 
Mightier  than  omnipotence. 


Will  perverse  thrusts  back  the  cry 
Nature   shrieks  against  the  strong, 

When  the  saintly  weakness  dies 
By  the  ravening  jaws  of  wrong. 

23- 
Vainly  flood  and  flame  and  storm. 

Wrath   and   torment   fiercely   lower. 
Holy  souls  upon  them  sweep. 

By  their  power,  beyond  their  power. 

24. 

Sinless  death  is  not  an  ill. 
Only  nature's  sweeter  sleep 

Waking  to  life's  other  day, 
Fresher  for  the  slumber  deep. 

25- 

Pain  is  nature's  sharpest  need. 

In  ordeal's  solemn  hour, 
Discipline  of  law  and  love. 

Power  repressed  by  purer  power. 

26. 

In  the  crucible  of  woe 

Sinks  the  metal  from  the  dross, 
And  an  endless  age  of  bliss 

Rises  from  the  transient  loss. 


i88i.]  COSMOS.  389 

27. 

To  the  Sovereign  King  of  kings 

Naught  is   little,  naught  is  great ; 
Heedful  of  an  insect's  chirp, 
Careless  of  a  monarch's  hate. 

28. 

We  who  spell  but  word  by  word, 

Cannot  read  the  mystery. 
But  the  long,  last  pages  lie 
Open  to  the  Deity. 

29. 

That  alone  is  good  for  each, 

Which  the  good  of  all  must  be, 
That  divinely  best   for  time, 

Which  is  best  eternally. 

30. 

'Tis  a  fair  and  wondrous  world, 

Passing  wondrous,  passing  fair; 
Miracle  on  miracle 

Crowds  the  earth  and  sea  and  air. 

31. 

When  from  thine  enchanting  form, 

All  that  veiled  its  beauty  fell 
In  the  light  of  morning  stars, 
He  who  made  thee,  loved  thee  well. 

32. 

He  whom  wonder  cannot  touch. 

When  thy  new-born  graces  stood 
In  those  awful  eyes  of  love, 
Spake,  and  called  thee  very  good. 

33- 
Still  the  marvel  of  his  work 

E'en  in  shattered  loveliness, 
Wakes  our  deepest  awe  and  joy 

Only  than  its  Author  less. 


390  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.[Cuaf.XIX. 

34- 

Loveliness,  that  must  be  loved, 

Breaks  with  a  resistless  wave, 
Day  and  night,  and  night  and  day, 

Till  it  dies  upon  our  grave. 

35. 
Ever,  ever,  ever  on, 

One  effulgent,   shoreless  stream, 
Paling  fancy's  latest  touch. 

Making  wildest  dreams  a  dream. 

36. 
Jewels  of  a  million  thrones 

Glitter  in  the  trodden  grass. 
Marshalled  in  unnoting  eyes, 

Glories  upon  glories  pass; 

37- 

Sunshine  in  the  dark  of  hills, 

Rifts  in  clouds  o'er  smiling  plains, 
Breaths  of  dew  on  parching  leaves, 
And  the  late  and  early  rains; 

38. 

Mute  processions,  drear  and  bright, 

Morn  and  eve,  come  trooping  on. 
Midnights  blazing  into  noons. 

Hosts  with  banners  round  the  sun. 

39- 

From  the  deeps  that  pierce  the  sky 

To  the  depths  of  deeps  below. 
All  that  wins  the  heart  to  bloom. 

And  the  God  within  to  glow — 

40. 

World  of  nature,  these  are  thine, 
Thoughts  of  God  in  form  of  sense, 

Down — till  vanishing  in  least. 
Up — till    lost   in   the   immense. 


i88i.]  COSMOS.  391 

41- 
Thou   for  man,  and  man  for  thee ; 

Ah!    did  he  accept  thy  part, 
Thou  wouldst  draw  him  close  to  God, 

Life  to  life,  and  heart  to  heart ! 

42. 

Symbols  of  the  still,  small  voice 

Lie  upon  thine  open  hand. 
And  the  thunder  of  God's  power 

Thou    wouldst    help    him    understand! 

43- 

With  the  music  of  thy  march 

Step  the  chroniclers  of  time. 
Sister-world  of  worlds  of  worlds 

Knit  in  unity  sublime! 

44. 

Vaster  orbs  are  not  thy  peers. 

In  thy  presence  hushed  their  pride, 

Here  our   God  was   manifest. 

Here  the  Incarnate  lived  and  died. 

45- 
Not  the  world  our  God  has  made, 

God  is  love,  His  work  is  love; 
And  the  light  which  plays  below 

Glimmers  by  the   light  above; 

46. 

But  the  world  which  sin  has  made, 
And  the  world  which  man  has  marred, 

Blighted  with  the  curse  of  wrong, 
With  the  bolts  of  justice  scarred; 

47- 

Cay  and  godless  in  her  shame. 
Flaunting  on  in  pomp  and  pride, 

Filled  with  cares  of  wealth  and  fame, 
Careless  of  the  Crucified. 


392  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Cuap.  XIX. 

48. 

Yet  the  world  we  may  not  love, 

Melts  into  a  happier  day, 
When  at  God's  transforming  word 

Sin  and  death  shall  pass  away. 

49- 

When  the  hating  world  shall  cease. 
And  the  hated  world  grow  bright. 

With  the  sun  of  righteousness 
In  redemption's  holy  light. 

SO. 

When  the  voices  from  the  throne, 

And  from  all   the  worlds  above. 
Mingle  with  the  sobbing  joy 

Of  the  world  won  back  to  love, 

51- 

Through  the  love  of  Him  who  loved, 
Through  the  death  of  Him  who  died, 

Through  the  life  of  Him  who  lives, 
Faithful  to  His   faithless  bride. 

52. 

O,  for  that  transcendent  change 

Which  her  bridal  shall  recall. 
And  with  robes  of  spotless  white. 

Cover  o'er  her  crimson  pall ! 

July,  1881. 


MICROCOSMOS. 


A   SEQUEL   TO   COSMOS. 


I. 

Flower-sown  Desert,  beach  of  towers, 
Blending  on  thy  bosom  fair. 

Beauties  of  the  blooming  soil. 
Grandeurs  of  the  earth  and  air — 


i882.]  MICROCOSMOS.  393 


Granite  amphitheatres 

Overlook  thy  battling  sea, 
Mazes  of   harmonious   tints. 

Hung  with   richest   tapestry. 

3- 

Nature's   woof   in    Nature's   warp. 
Interwoven  sweet  and  wild. 

Green  with  crimson,  fire  in  dew, 
Tenseness  melting  to  the  mild. 

4- 

To  the  ripple  of  thy  birds 

Ripple  soft  thy  lake-born  streams, 
Infancy  to  music  sleeps. 

And  the  waking  thinks  he  dreams. 

S- 

Snowy  clouds  thy  skies  o'erdrift, 
Mingling  heavenly  hue  with  hue. 

Like  thy  lilies'  spotless  white 
Bathing  in  the  nether  blue. 


Fire  thy  cradle  at  thy  birth. 
Ice   thy   later   swaddling-band, 

Thou  art  grown  to  ripest  grace. 
Fondling  of  the  sea  and  land ! 

7- 

Glowing  waves  that   roll   no  more. 
Surfs  of  flame,  eternal  stone. 

Rear  thy  billowing  palace-walls. 
Fix  for  thee  thy  matchless  throne. 


On  thy  scarred  yet  lovely  face 
Beams  the  record  of  thy  past. 

Nursling  of  the  mighty  main. 
Weaned  and   from  her  bosom  cast. 


394  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  KIX. 

9- 

On  the  eternal  pivot  hangs 

Tidal  time,  thy  lunar  day, 
Emerald  walls  with  crisping  copes, 

Pendulating    into    spray. 

10. 

Microcosmos,  great  in  small, 

Cameo  of  the  age-cut  land. 
World  in   faithful  miniature, 

Set  in  jewels  of  the  strand — 

II. 

God  hath  made  thee ! — that  were  proof, 

All  the  forms  of  proof  above. 
Beauty  is  the  heart  of  Heaven, 

And  the  God  we  love  is  Love ! 

Lake  Flora,  Mt.  Desert. 
July,  1882. 

After  his  return  from  Mount  Desert  it  seemed  for  a 
little  while  as  if  his  health  had  been  really  benefitted,  but 
ere  long  his  strength  broke  down  completely.  Now  and 
then  he  dragged  himself  wearily  to  the  University  and  to 
the  Seminary.  His  last  visit  to  the  latter  institution  was 
on  December  4,  1882,  to  attend  a  meeting  of  the  Trustees 
of  the  General  Council. 

His  intimate  friend,  John  K.,  Shryock,  thus  tells  the 
story  of  his  last  interview  with  him : 

The  very  last  time  he  was  down  town  he  visited  me  as 
was  his  wont,  at  my  place  of  business,  and  he  seemed  dull 
for  the  first  time.  I  succeeded  in  cheering  him  up,  and 
we  gradually  drifted  into  our  ordinary  joking  way  with 
each  other.  Here  let  me  say,  that  no  matter  how  we 
talked,  or  what  we  ever  talked  about,  he  never  once  left 
me  without  becoming  serious,  and  without  saying  some- 
thing that  indicated  the  clergyman.  Upon  his  rising  to 
go  away  I,  as  usual,  accompanied  him  to  the  door,  and  he^ 


i88_'.j  •'BETTER,  BUT  NOT  WELL."  395 

as  usual,  bade  me  goodbye.  He  clasped  both  my  hands 
in  his,  and  looking-  into  my  face  with  tears  in  his  eyes, 
said  with  deep  feeling:  "O,  my  boy,  it  is  well  for  you 
and  for  me  that  we  have  a  Saviour  to  make  uj)  all  our 
deficiencies."  With  these  last  words  he  walked  aw^ay, 
but  after  a  few  steps  he  turned  about  and  waved  his  last 
goodbye  with  the  dear  hand  that  had  so  often  clasped 
mine  in  as  true  a  friendship  as  man  can  ever  know  this 
side  of  heaven.  When  next  I  saw  him,  his  soul  had  gone 
into  the  presence  of  his  Saviour,  who  "made  up  all  his 
deficiencies." 

In  his  obituary  notice,  read  before  the  American 
Philosophical  Society,  March  16,  1883,  Dr.  F.  A.  Mueh- 
lenberg  says : 

On  his  return  from  the  last  trip  (to  Mount  Desert), 
in  answer  to  a  question  of  one  of  his  friends  as  to  his 
health,  he  replied  with  sadness,  as  though  looking  for- 
ward to  an  unfavorable  result,  "better,  but  not  well." 
The  truth  of  this  became  painfully  manifest  when  he 
resumed  his  duties  in  the  University.  He  was  very  far 
from  being  well.  His  associates  observed  that  his 
vivacity  and  vitality,  and  his  powers  of  endurance  were 
rapidly  decreasing.  Especially  marked  was  this  decline 
in  the  daily  chapel  services.  Each  succeeding  day, 
through  increasing  weakness,  he  brought  his  chair  nearer 
to  the  reading  desk,  until  the  day  before  he  was  ordered 
by  his  physicians  to  relinquish  all  his  duties,  they  were 
placed  alongside  of  each  other,  and  it  was  with  difficulty 
he  could  stand  up  to  perform  the  devotions. 

By  this  time  his  friends  at  the  University  had  become 
thoroughly  alarmed  about  his  condition.  Mr.  F.  Fraley 
wrote  to  him  (December  18,  1882)  :  "I  have  requested 
Dr.  Pepper  to  meet  me  this  evening,  when  we  will  arrange 
for  the  earliest  possible  action  of  the  Trustees.  I  shall 
do  everything  in  my  power  to  relieve  you  and  contribute 
to  your  comfort.     I  hope  a  period  of  rest  will  restore  you 


396  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIX. 

to  health."  Similar  hopes  were  expressed  in  a  touching 
letter  from  Dr.  Passavant,  which  we  insert  below. 
Neither  his  nor  Mr.  Fraley's  letter  reached  Dr.  Krauth's 
eyes.  The  "rest"  they  wished  for  him  was  to  come  in 
another  form! 

Pittsburgh,  Sunday,  December  17,  1882. 
My  Dear  Friend  and  Brother  Krauth. 
Grace  and  Peace. 

....  You  are  continually  in  my  thoughts,  and,  fail- 
ing to  see  you  in  Lancaster,  and  since  in  Philadelphia, 
where  I  expected  to  have  been,  I  have  no  way  left  but  to 
sit  down  and  write  you  a  brotherly  letter.  I  have  heard 
incidentally  that  you  have  given  up  your  Herculean  work 
in  the  two  institutions,  to  try  that  absolute  rest  from 
brain  work,  which  you  so  much  needed  even  last  spring. 
Most  heartily  do  I  rejoice  in  this,  dear  Doctor,  for  that 
was  a  superhuman  toil,  not  so  much  in  the  actual  work 
done,  but  in  the  preparations  for  it,  and  in  the  burden- 
some sense  of  a  conflict  of  duties  which  wears  out  both 
mind  and  body.  It  seems  to  me  as  if  the  voice  of  Christ 
said  to  you :  "Take  your  rest  noiv,"  after  such  exertions, 
and  that  the  sign  of  distress  which  exhausted  nature 
hangs  out  under  such  a  load,  must  be  heeded,  unwilling  as 
you  are  to  do  so,  and  eager  as  your  spirit  is  for  the  con- 
flicts before  us  in  the  high  places  of  the  field. 

But  I  must  not  weary  you  with  words.  I  write  only  to 
assure  you  of  the  deep  gratitude  of  a  great  communion 
for  what  God  has  enabled  you  to  do  for  His  suffering  and 
sorrowing  Church.  I  can  scarcely  believe  it  when  I  look 
back  two  score  years,  and  think  of  the  current  of  un- 
churchly  sentimentalism,  down  which  we  both  and  so 
many  others  were  floating — never  suspecting  where  we 
would  be  drifted.  It  is  of  God's  sweet  mercy,  that  we 
were  "called  through  the  Gospel,  enlightened  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  sanctified  and  preserved  in  the  true  faith,"  in 
the  midst  of  the  elements  of  error  and  sectarianism  on 


i883.]  ECCE,   QVOMODO  MORITVR  JUSTUS. 


397 


every  side.  How  blessed  to  have  been  led  in  a  way  we 
knew  not  of.  and  to  have  been  all  the  time  in  the  en- 
circlings  of  our  Father's  arms!  The  ways  of  God  have 
been  wonderful  and  full  of  mercy.  I  constantly  praise 
Him  that  out  of  the  deep  soul-troubles  of  life  God  led 
you  to  direct  us  to  better  ways,  as  He  had  directed  you, 
and  that  now,  though  compelled  for  a  time  to  rest  in  your 
tent,  you  are  permitted  to  see  the  host  of  Israel,  under 
Christ  her  heavenly  King,  moving  onward  to  new  and 
more  glorious  conquests  for  our  Lord.  The  leaders  in 
this  new  warfare,  men  like  Drs.  N.  and  N.,  and  others 
whom  God  is  raising  up  for  this  blessed  work,  have 
entered  into  your  labours,  and  they  are  not  insensible  of 
the  services  you  have  rendered.  But,  what  is  of  such 
unspeakable  importance,  is,  that  not  man,  but  Jesus 
Christ  is  the  recipient  of  the  glory — all  the  glory,  and  in 
this  we  both  rejoice,  yea  and  we  will  rejoice. 

On  December  1 5th  he  lay  down  on  the  bed  from  which 
he  was  no  more  to  rise,  a  thoroughly  wearied  and 
exhausted  man,  who  desired  nothing  but  rest.  He  asked 
to  be  left  alone  with  his  God.  Even  when  his  nearest 
and  dearest  would  peep  into  his  room,  he  would,  with 
a  tender  word  of  greeting  and  a  loving  look  in  his  eye, 
sign  to  them  to  withdraw.  There  was  no  posing  in  the 
last  moments  of  this  brave  warrior  who  had  fought  a 
good  fight,  who  had  finished  his  course,  who  had  kept 
the  faith.  Silently,  peacefully,  almost  unnoticed,  he 
passed  away  at  mid-day,  January  2d,  in  the  year  of  the 
great  Luther  centennial,  1883.  "When  his  last  Finally 
for  this  world  came,  when  the  partings  and  the  tears 
were  over,  when  he  entered  upon  that  last  journey  which 
each  of  us  must  take  alone,  he  was  yet  not  alone,  for 
he  passed  from  the  fellowships  of  earth  into  the  brother- 
hood which  embraces  heaven  and  earth  in  its  scope,  into 
the  great  company  which  no  man  can  number. 


398  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chap.  XIX. 

'Tis  human  fortune's  happiest  height  to  be, 

A  spirit  melodious,  lucid,  poised  and  whole  : 
Second  in  order  of  felicity 
I  hold  it,  to  have  walked  with  such  a  soul."  * 

The  funeral  was  held  on  Friday,  January  5th.  At 
eleven  A.  M.  a  brief  service  was  conducted  at  the  house 
by  the  Rev.  John  K.  Plitt,  pastor  of  St.  Stephen's 
Church,  with  which  Dr.  Krauth  had  been  connected 
for  years,  first  as  its  pastor  and  then  as  a  member.  It 
was  one  o'clock  when  the  funeral  cortege  reached  St. 
Johannis  Church,  where  the  public  service  was  to  be 
held.  The  faculty  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania, 
tog-ether  with  a  large  number  of  students ;  the  Board  of 
Directors,  and  the  students  of  the  Theological  Seminary, 
and  many  pastors,  not  only  from  the  Synods  of  Penn- 
sylvania, New  York  and  Pittsburgh,  but  also  from  the 
General  Synod,  formed  the  procession  that  entered  the 
church,  which  was  draped  in  mourning.  The  choir  of 
St.  Johannis  opened  the  service  with  the  Chorale : 
"Wenn  ich  in  Todesnoeten  bin"  (Melchior  Frank,  1651). 
Dr.  B.  Sadtler,  President  of  Muehlenberg  College,  read 
the  ninetieth  Psalm,  followed  by  the  New  Testament 
lesson,  I  Thess.  iv.  13-18.  Dr.  J.  A.  Seiss,  President  of 
the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Seminary,  and  at  that 
time  also  President  of  the  Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania, 
offered  prayer.  Dr.  C.  W.  Schaeffer,  Chairman  of  the 
Faculty,  delivered  the  address  in  English.  Dr.  G.  F. 
Krotel  followed  with  prayer  in  the  same  language.  The 
choir  then  sang  the  Responsory  "Ecce  quoinodo  moritur 
Justus"  by  Jacob  Gallus  (1591)  with  its  beautiful  re- 
frain: "Et  erit  in  pace  memoria  sua."  This  was  fol- 
lowed by  a  German  address  by  Dr.  W.  J.  Mann,  and  a 

*Dr.  Robert  Ellis  Thompson,  in  his  Baccalaureate  sermon, 
preached  before  the  graduating  class  of  the  University  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, on  Sunday,  June  loth,  1883. 


i883.]  AT   REST.  ^gg 

prayer  in  the  same  language  by  Dr.  H.  Grahn,  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  first  District  Conference.  The  great  congre- 
gation slowly  passed  the  coffin,  for  a  last  look  upon  that 
countenance  which  had  once  been  so  bright  with  life 
and  genius  and  pleasantness,  but  now  in  the  coldness  of 
death  spoke  of  the  sufferings  through  which  the  departed 
had  passed. 

The  pall  bearers  were  Professors  Jackson  and  Kendall 
from  the  University,  and  Messrs.  Wharton  Barker, 
Horace  Howard  Furness,  Thomas  Lane  of  Pittsburgh, 
J.  K.  Shryock,  Henry  Beates  and  Reuben  Miller.  The 
remains  were  conveyed  to  North  Laurel  Hill,  where  Dr. 
B.  M.  Schmucker  conducted  the  services  at  the  grave. 
His  resting  place  is  only  a  few  steps  to  the  right  from 
the  main  entrance  of  that  cemetery.  A  plain  granite 
cross  marks  the  spot. 

H  Dr.  Krauth,  with  his  wealth  of  gifts,  his  compre- 
hensive aesthetic  and  philosophical  culture,  his  inexhaust- 
ible humor  and  sparkling  wit,  his  exquisite  taste  and 
knowledge  of  the  world,  his  personal  magnetism  which 
even  disarmed  his  antagonists,  had  thrown  himself  into 
the  current  of  the  prevailing  spirit  of  the  times,  if  he 
had  bowed  to  the  idols  of  the  day,  he  would  have  become 
one  of  the  most  popular  and  most  lionized  men  of  our 
time  and  our  country. 

But  he  esteemed  the  reproach  of  Christ  greater  riches 
than  the  treasures  of  Egypt.  He  who  was  so  free  from 
petty  narrowness  or  pharisaic  zealotism,  was  denounced 
as  a  bigot  on  account  of  his  consistent  faithfulness  to  the 
Confession  of  his  Church.  He  who  loved  peace  above 
everything,  except  the  truth,  and  who  could  see  some 
good  everywhere,  was  driven  into  perpetual  controversy. 
And  yet,  in  these  very  contests  in  defense  of  the  pure 
faith,  he  possessed  in  an  eminent  degree  that  rare 
charisma,  which  enabled  him  to  conduct  the  warfare 
without  personal  bitterness,   full  of  anxiety  that  there 


400  CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH.  [Chaf.  XIX. 

should  be  no  injustice  done  to  the  adversary  and  no  abuse 
of  the  weakness  of  the  weakest  of  his  opponents;  he 
fought  principles  and  not  men. 

The  testimony  he  has  left  behind  cannot  die  with  his 
death.  Here  also  the  Saviour's  words  may  be  applied: 
"Except  a  corn  of  wheat  fall  into  the  ground  and  die,  it 
abideth  alone:  but  if  it  die,  it  bringeth  forth  much 
fruit.'' 


LIST  OF  DR.  KRAUTH'S  PUBLICATIONS 

REVISED  AND  ENLARGED,  FROM  THE  LIST  GIVEN   IN  DR.  B.  M.  SCHMUCKEr's 
MEMORIAL,   PRINTED   FOR   THE    MINISTERIUM    OF   PENNSYLVANIA. 

1846.  Articles  in  the  Lutheran  Observer,  during  absence  in  Europe  of 

Dr.  B.  Kurtz,  from  April  loth  to  Sept.  nth,  1846. 

1847.  Article  on  "Private  Communion,"  against  Dr.  B.  Kurtz.     Lu- 

theran Observer,  July  23d,  1847. 
1847.  Benefits  of  the  Pastoral  Office :     Farewell  Discourse  on  leaving 

Second    English    Lutheran    Church,    Baltimore.     Baltimore. 

8vo. 
1849.  The   Person  of  Christ.     Translated   from   H.    Schmid's   Dog- 

matik.     Mercersburg  Review,  Vol.  I.  272.   May,  1849.   pp.  34. 
1849.  Chrysostom    considered    with    reference   to    Training    for   the 

Pulpit.     Evangelical  Review,  I.  p.  84.     July.     pp.  20. 

1849.  The  Relation  of  our  Confessions  to  the  Reformation,  and  the 

Importance  of  their  Study,  with  an  Outline  of  the  Early 
History  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  Evangelical  Review  I., 
p.  234,  Oct.     pp.  29. 

1850.  Harn    on    Feet    Washing.     Evangelical    Review    I.,    434,    Jan. 

pp.  4. 
1850.  The  Articles  of  Torgau,  translated.     Evangelical  Review   II., 
78,  July.     pp.  7. 

1850.  The  Transfiguration.     Evangelical  Review  II.,  237,  Oct.   pp.  29. 

Separately  printed.  An  Exegetical  Homily.  Gettsburg. 
1850.     pp.  36. 

1851.  Popular  Amusements:  Discourse  delivered  at  Winchester,  Va., 

June  8,  1851.  Winchester.  8vo.,  pp.  32.  Second  Edition 
1852.     pp.  38. 

1852.  Dr.  Martin  Luther,  the  German  Reformer:  Review  of  Koenig 

and  Gelzer's  Luther.  Evangelical  Review  III.,  451,  April. 
pp.  41.     In  Conserv.  Reformat.,  with  additions,  p.  22-74. 

1852.  Works  of  Melanchthon;  Bibliographical  Notice;  A  Review  of 
Corpus  Reformatorum.     Evangelical  Review  III.,  575.  pp.  8. 

1852.  The  Bible  a  Perfect  Book :  Discourse  before  Bible  Society  of 
Pennsylvania  College  and  the  Theological  Seminary.  Evan- 
gelical Review  IV.,  no,  July.  pp.  28.  Separately  printed. 
Gettysburg.  8vo.,  pp.  38.  Second  Edition.  Revised  1857. 
Reprinted  in  the  Lutheran  Church  Review  1906.  July  and 
October. 
26  401 


402       CHARLES  PORTERFIELD  KRAUTH. 

1853.  The  Church  as  set  forth  in  the  Confessions  of  Christendom ; 
translated  from  Guericke's  Symbolik.  Evangelical  Review 
v.,  17.     July.     pp.   18. 

1853.  The  Services  of  the  Churches  of  the  Reformation,  on  the  Basis 

of  Alt's  Cultus ;  translated  with  additions.  Evangelical  Re- 
view v.,  151,  Oct.     pp.  39.     Separately  printed. 

1854.  The  Unity  of  the  Lutheran  Church :    Sermon  for  Reformation 

Festival,  by  F.  V.  Reinhard ;  translated.  Evangelical  Re- 
view v.,  352,  June.     pp.  13. 

1854.  The  Old  Church  on  the  Hill :  At  the  Burning  of  the  old  Luth- 
eran Church  at  Winchester,  Sept.  27;  with  an  original  ode. 
Winchester.     8vo.,  pp.  24. 

1856  to  i860.  Contributions  to  the  "Missionary,"  edited  by  Dr. 
Passavant. 

1856.  Tholuck's  Commentary  on  John:  Introduction;  translated. 
Evangelical  Review  VIL,  301,  Jan.     pp.  46. 

1856.  The  Former  Days  and  these  Days :  Thanksgiving  Discourse, 
Nov.  30.     Pittsburgh,  W.  S.  Haven.     8vo.,  pp.  35. 

1856.  The  Lutheran  Church  and  the  Divine  Obligation  of  the  Lord's 

Day.     Gettysburg.     Henry  C.  Neinstedt.     pp.  53. 

1857.  The  same  in  Evangelical  Review.     January,  1857.     pp.  44. 
1857.  History  of  Theological  Encyclopaedia  and  Methodology  in  the 

Evangelical  Lutheran  Church  from  the  middle  of  the  17th 
to  the  beginning  of  the  19th  Century.  Evangelical  Review 
IX.,  278,  Oct.     pp.  15. 

1857.  The  Altar  on  the  Threshing  Floor :    Thanksgiving  Discourse, 

Nov.     Pittsburgh,  W.  S.  Haven.     8vo.,  pp.  35. 

1858.  Tholuck's   Commentary  on  John,   Chap   i ;   translated.     Evan- 

gelical Review  IX.,  301,  Jan.     pp.  38. 
1858.  Select   Analytical    Bibliography   of   the   Augsburg   Confession. 
Evangelical     Review     X.,     16,     July.     pp.     14.     Separately 
printed. 

1858.  Poverty :     Three   Essays   for   the   Season.     Pittsburgh,   W.    S. 

Haven.     8vo.,  pp.  48. 

1859.  Tholuck's    Commentary    on    the    Gospel    of    John ;    translated. 

Philadelphia,  Smith,  English  &  Co.     8vo.,  pp.  440. 
1859.  Introduction  to   Seeker's  The  Nonsuch   Professor.     Published 

by  Shryock,  Taylor  &  Smith,  of  Chambersburg. 
i860.  Christian  Liberty  in  Relation  to  the  Usages  of  the  Evangelical 

Lutheran  Church  Maintained  and  Defended  :    Two  Sermons 

at  St.  Mark's  Church,  Philadelphia,  Mar.  25.     Philadelphia, 

H.  B.  Ashmead.     8vo.,  pp.  72. 


1860-76.]  LIST   OF   PUBLICATIONS.  403 

i860.  Fleming's  Vocabulary  of  Philosophy;  Edited,  with  Introduc- 
tion, Chronology  brought  to  i860,  Bibliographical  Index, 
Synthetical  Tables,  and  other  additions.  Philadelphia ; 
Smith,  English  &  Co.     i2mo. 

i860.  The  Evangelical  Mass  and  the  Romish  Mass.  Evangelical 
Review  XII.,  263,  Oct.  pp.  57.  Separately  printed.  Gettys- 
burg,    pp.  64. 

1861.  Became  Editor  of  Lutheran  and  Missionary  Oct.  31.  Articles 
on  Bible  Revision  and  History  of  the  Authorized  Version, 
Feb.  6th  to  June  19th,  1862.  The  Ministry  and  Church 
Polity,  March  ist  and  15th,  June  7th,  1861 ;  July  i6th,  23d 
and  30th,  Aug.  20th,  Sept.  3d,  1863.  Liturgies,  Oct.  19th, 
i860  (May  29th,  1862)  ;  June  5th,  June  26th,  .\ug.  14th,  Sept. 
4th  and  25th,  Dec.  4th  and  nth,  1862;  Jan.  25th,  Feb.  22d, 
March  8th,  Oct.  nth,  Nov.  15th  and  22d,  1866;  Jan.  loth, 
Feb.  14th,  March  28th,  April  25th,  May  2d,  Dec.  19th,  1867. 
Lutheranism  and  Calvinism.  Feb.,  1868.  (4  Art.)  Litur- 
gieal  Controversy  in  the  German  Reformed  Church.  Aug., 
1869.  (3  Art.)  Pulpit  and  Altar  Fellon'ship.  Dec,  1875- 
June,  1876.     (14  Art.) 

1863.  The  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church:  her  glory,  perils,  defen.se, 

victory,  duty  and  perpetuity.  Reformation  Festival  Dis- 
course at  St.  John's,  Nov.  i.  Philadelphia.  Smith,  English 
&  Co.     8vo.     pp.  15. 

1864.  Address  at  Installation  in  Theological  Seminary  in   Philadel- 

phia, Oct.  4.  Ev.  Rev.  X'VL,  434.  July,  1865.  pp.  14. 
Separately  printed.     Most  of  it  in  Conservative  Reformation. 

1865.  The  Two  Pageants :     On  the  death  of  Abraham  Lincoln.     Dis- 

course in  Lutheran  Church,  Pittsburgh,  June  i.  W.  S. 
Haven.     8vo.,  pp.  23. 

1866.  Baptism  :     The  Doctrine  set  forth  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  and 

taught  in  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church.  Ev.  Rev.  XVII. 
309.  July.  pp.  60.  In  Conservative  Reformation,  p.  426 
seq.  518  seq.  Published  in  pamphlet  form  by  T.  S.  Schrack. 
72  pages. 
1866.  Call  for  the  Convention  which  formed  the  General  Council. 
.'\ug.  10. 

1866.  Fundamental  Principles  of  Faith  and  Church  Polity  of  General 

Council,  presented  at  Convention,  Reading,  Dec.  12-14.  Pro- 
ceedings p.   10-14. 

1867.  Shedd's  History  of  Christian  Doctrine,  with  special  reference 

to  its  statements  in  regard  to  the  Confessions  and  Doctrine 


404 


CHARLES   PORTERFIELD    KRAUTH. 


of  the  Lutheran  Church.  (Lutheran  and  Miss.  Jan.  and 
Feb.,  1864.)  Ev.  Rev.  XVIIL  56.  Jan.  pp.  27.  In  Con- 
servative Reformation,  VIIL  p.  329-354. 
1867.  The  Person  of  our  Lord  and  His  Sacramental  Presence.  The 
Evangelical  Lutheran  and  Reformed  Doctrine  compared. 
Review  of  an  Article  by  Dr.  E.  V.  Gerhart.  Ev.  Rev. 
XVIIL  395.     July.     pp.  42.     In  Conservative  Reformation, 

X.   p.  456-517- 

1867.  Jubilee  Service :     An  Order  of  Divine  Service  for  the  Seventh 

Jubilee  of  the  Reformation.     Philadelphia :    J.  B.  Lippincott 
&  Co.     i2mo.  pp.  24. 

1868.  The  Augsburg  Confession,  translated,  with  Introduction,  Notes 

and  Index.     Philadelphia.     Tract  and  Book  Society  of   St. 
John's  Church.     April.     8vo.     pp.  1.  91. 

1869.  Luther's  Translation  of  the  Holy  Scriptures :  the  New  Testa- 

ment.    Mercersburg  Review,  Vol.  XVI.  180.     pp.  20. 

1869.  56  Theses  on  the  Ministerial  Office;  prepared  for  the  Minis- 
terium  of  Penna. 

1869.  The  Reformation :  Its  Occasions  and  Causes.  Ev.  Rev.  XX. 
94.     Jan.     pp.  18.     In  Conserv.  Reform,  p.  1-21. 

1869.  The  Liturgical  Movement  in  the  Presbyterian  and  Reformed 
Churches.  Mercersburg  Review,  XVI.  599.  pp.  49.  Pub- 
lished in  Pamphlet  form,  Lutheran  Bookstore,  807  Vine  St. 
Reformed  Publication  Rooms,  54  N.  Sixth  St.,  Philadelphia. 

1869.  Reply  to  the  Pope's  Letter.     G.  C.  Min.   1869,  p.   14. 

1870.  A  Historic  Sketch  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War.     In  The  Iron 

Age.     Fatherland  Series.     Philadelphia.     Lutheran  Board  of 
Publication.     1870.     pp.    169-236. 
1870.  The  New  Testament  Doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  as  con- 
fessed   by    the    Lutheran    Church.     Mercersburg    Review. 
XVII.  165.     pp.  72. 

1870.  Theses  on  Justification  for  the  General  Council.     Min.   1871, 

P-  57- 

1871.  Address  in  behalf  of  the  New  Lutheran  Church    (Broad  and 

Arch  Sts.)  pp.  8.     Lutheran  Bookstore. 

1871.  The   Conservative   Reformation   and   its   Theology.     Philadel- 

phia.    J.  B.  Lippincott  &  Co.     8vo.  pp.  xvii,  840. 

1872.  Franz  Delitzsch,  his  Life  and  Works.     In  A  Day  in  Capernaum. 

Philadelphia.  Lutheran  Board  of  Publication,  pp.  18. 
1872.  Notes  in  Class — System  of  Descartes.  Penn  Monthly,  HI. 
1872.  The    Prophecies    of    Isaiah.     A    new    and    critical    translation 

from  Franz  Delitzsch.     Prefatory  Note. 


1873-79]  LIST  OF  PUBLICATIONS.  405 

1873.  An  Introduction  to  Luther's  95  Theses.     In  The  Great  Reform- 

ation.    Lutheran  Bookstore,     pp.  30. 

1874.  Infant  Baptism  and  Infant  Salvation  in  the  Calvinistic  System. 

A  Review  of  Dr.  Hodge's  Systematic  Theology.  Philadel- 
phia. Lutheran  Bookstore.  8vo.  pp.  83.  In  Mercersburg 
Review.     Vol.  XXI.  99.     pp.  61. 

1874.  Caesar  and  God.  Luth.  and  Miss.,  Nov.  26,  1874.  Printed 
separately  the  same  year.     Lutheran  Bookstore. 

1874.  Report  on  the  Bucknell  library,  Phila.  1874.     pp.  6. 

1874.  Ulrici's  Review  of  Strauss'  Life  of  Christ.     Introduction. 

1874.  The  Strength  and  Weakness  of  Idealism.  In  Proceedings  of 
Evangelical  Alliance,  New  York,  p.  293-301.  And  in  Pro- 
legomena to  Berkeley's  Principles. 

1874.  Berkeley's   Principles.     Prolegomena,  notes  of  Ueberweg  and 

original    annotations.     Phila.     Smith,    English    &    Co.     8vo. 
pp.  424. 
1874-75.  Thetical  Statement  concerning  the  Ministry  of  the  Gospel. 
Lutheran  and  Missionary.     December  31,   1874.     January  7 
and  21.     February  18.  1875. 

1875.  Constitution    for    Evangelical    Lutheran    Congregations,    sub- 

mitted to  the  General  Council. 

1876.  One  Faith.     Sermon  preached  at  the  opening  of  the  Conven- 

tion of  the  General  Council  in  Bethlehem,  Pa.  The  Luth- 
eran, November  2.  Reprinted  in  the  Lutheran  Church  Re- 
view, 1907.     April. 

1877.  Theses  on  Pulpit  and  Altar  Fellowship,  prepared  by  order  of 

the  Gen.  Council.  8vo.  pp.  32.  Reprinted  in  the  Lutheran 
Church  Review,  July  and  October,  1907 ;  January  and  April, 
1908. 
1877.  Religion  and  Religionisms.  Sermon  before  the  Gen.  Council, 
Phila.,  Oct.  ID.  8vo.  pp.  2>2.  Reprinted  in  the  Lutheran 
Church  Review,  April,  1907. 

1877.  The  Relation  of  the  Lutheran  Church  to  the  Denominations 

around  us.  Read  at  the  first  Free  Lutheran  Diet,  Dec.  27. 
Philadelphia.  J.  F.  Smith,  8vo.  pp.  27-69.  Printed  separ- 
ately, pp.  43,  1878. 

1878.  A  Chronicle  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.     Luth.  Monographs 

I.     Phila.     J.  F.  Smith,  8vo.  pp.  92. 

1878.  Vocabulary  of  the   Philosophical   Sciences,   Second  edition  of 

Fleming.     New   York.     Sheldon  &  Co.     pp.   109  additional. 

1879.  The  Authorized  Version  and  English  Versions  on  which  it  is 

based.  Anglo-American  Bible  Revision.  New  York, 
p.  22-36. 


4o6      CHARLES  PORT  ERF  I  ELD  KRAUTH. 

879.  Congratulatory  Address  at  the  Inauguration  of  Prcs.  Dreher, 

Roanoke  College,  Salem,  Va.     pp.  7. 

880.  The  Library.     Stoddart's  Review,  I.,  6.     Philadelphia.     April 

17th. 
880.  Introduction  to  "Doom  Eternal,"  by  Rev.  J.  B.  Reimensnyder. 
Phila.     Nelson  S.  Quiney,  pp.  6. 

880.  Remarks   at  the  Funeral   of    Dr.    C.    F.    Schaeffer.     Schaeffer 

Memorial,  Phila.     8vo.  p.  10-12. 

881.  Address  of  Welcome  at  the  Inauguration  of  Provost  W.  Pep- 

per, University  of  Penna.     Feb.  22.     pp.  12. 

881.  Cosmos,  in  the  Rhymes  of  a  Summer  Holiday  Journey.     Phila. 

i6mo.  pp.  24. 

882.  Microcosmos.       A     sequel     to     Cosmos.       Lake     Flora,     Mt. 

Desert,  July,  1882.     Printed  for  friends. 
882.  The  Pulpit  and  the  Age.     Lutheran  Church  Review,  Vol  I.  10. 
January,     pp.  6.     The  Lutheran,  April  20. 

882.  The  Sermon :     Its  Material  and  its  Text.     Lutheran  Church 

Review,  Vol.  I.  81.     April,     pp.  19. 

883.  Church   Polity    ( from   Notes  of  Seminary  Lectures  by  G.   C. 

Gardener. )     The  Lutheran  Church  Review.     October ;  and 
April  and  October,  1884. 

884.  The    Controversy    on    Predestination.     The    Lutheran    Church 

Review.     January,     pp.  4. 

Contributions  to  Encyclopedias.  Of  Johnson's  he  was  Asso- 
ciate Editor,  and  the  following  articles  have  his  signature:  Bud- 
deus ;  Cause ;  Communicatio  Idiomatum ;  Concomitance,  Sacra- 
mental ;  Concord,  Book  of ;  Concord,  Formula  of ;  Conditional, 
Philosophy  of  the;  Consubstantiation ;  Faith;  Faith,  Confessions  of; 
Faith,  Rule  of ;  Fall  of  Man ;  Fatliers  of  the  Church ;  Figure,  Gram- 
matical and  Rhetorical ;  Final  Causes ;  Flacius ;  Foreknowledge ; 
Foreordination ;  Francke,  A.  H. ;  Free-will ;  Fundamentals  ;  Heresy ; 
Hierarchy ;  Inquisition ;  Jacobs,  M. ;  Karnak ;  Knox,  John ;  Lord's 
Day ;  Lutheran  Church ;  Lutheran  Church  in  the  U.  S. ;  Manetho ; 
Mennonites;  Metaphj-sics ;  Monophysites;  Monothelites ;  Mysticism; 
Nestorians ;  Pantheism.  See  Index,  Vol  IV.,  p.  xiii.  Unsigned : 
Krauth,  Charles  Philip. 

The  article  in  McClintock  &  Strong's  Encyclopedia,  though  his 
initials  are  attached,  was  not  written  by  him,  but  by  one  of  the  Col- 
laborateurs  on  the  basis  of  material  furnished  by  Dr.  Krauth,  and  he 
was  annoyed  that  it  was  accredited  to  him. 

He  also  furnished  Articles  on  Luther  or  the  Lutheran  Church  to 
Appleton's  Cyclopedia  and  Potter's  Bible  Encyclopedia. 


1842-82.]  LIST   OF   PUBLICATIONS.  407 

Introductions. — He  furnished  the  Introduction  to  Dr.  Seiss' 
Psalms  and  Canticles.  Prof.  M.  Jacobs'  Sketch  of  the  Battle  of  Get- 
tysburg, 1864,  Brown's  Self-Interpreting  Bible,  18C5.  Illustrirte 
Heilige  Schrift.     The  Father's  Story  of  Charlie  Ross,  1876. 

TRANSLATIONS  OF  HYMNS— POEMS. 

Dies  Irae,  in  Luth.  and  Miss.     Feb.  11,  1864. 

Puer  Natus,  in  Sunday  School  Book,  No.  70. 

Ein  Feste  Burg,  in  Jubilee  Service,  No.  19. 

Det  kimer  nu  til  Julefest.     S.  S.  Book,  No.  71.     Original  by 

Bishop  N.  F.  S.  Grundtvig. 

To  the  Hands  of  the  Lord  Jesus :  after  St.  Bernard  and 

Paul  Gerhardt,  prepared  for  Wildenhahn's  Paul  Gerhardt, 

1880. 

A  number  of  original  poems  appeared  at  different  times  in  different 

papers    from    1842,    in    the   "Annual"    (Baltimore)    to    1882    in    the 

"Workman"  (Pittsburgh).    Among  them:  A  Tribute  (to  the  memory 

of    his    first    wife),    Winchester    Republican,    Dec.    30,    1853.     The 

Spring  Evening,  Linnean  Journal,   Dec,   1847.     The  Birth  of  Eve, 

Missionary,    July,    1859.     Apostles'    Creed,    1864,    Luth.    and    Miss. 

Class  Song   (University  of  Pennsylvania),   1869,  Anonymous.     The 

Palm,    1879.     The    Poor    Saint.     First    Sunday    after    Trinity.     The 

Cloud  of  Witnesses.     2  Kings  6 :   16.     The  Dread  Answer.     Psalm 

106:  15.     The  Lamb's  Bride — The  Church  Triumphant.     The  City  of 

God.    The  Land  of  Light.    Fervent  Prayer.    The  Orange  Tree. 


i 


INDEX. 


Abbott  ;  Rev.  Ezra,  Reports  on 
Bucknell  Library,  ii.  282 ;  esti- 
mate of  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  283. 

"Abstract  "  of  Maryland  Synod  ; 
i.  111-114;  C.  P.  K.'s  notes  on, 
i.  1 12,  and  note:  forerunner 
of  Definite  Platform,  i.  114; 
covers  real  doctrinal  position 
of  Gen.  Synod,  (S.  S.  S.)  i. 
346. 

Adam ;  George,  sponsor  of  C.  Ph. 
K.,   i.   2. 

Age;  reverence  for,  ii.  88. 

Aimless  Battle ;  the,  from  edi- 
torial, L.  &  M.,  ii.  114. 

Allan;  Rev.  W.  O.,  i.  242,  note. 

Alliance ;  Evangelical,  London, 
1846.  Delegates  to,  i.  74 ; 
its    "  Summary    of    doctrine," 

i.  341- 
(New  York)  C.  P.  K.'s 

paper  on  Idealism,  ii.  272,  322. 
Altar    on    the    Threshing    Floor ; 

the.   Thanksgiving   Discourse ; 

"  truly  prophetical,"  i.  299. 
America    a    Blessing    to    Others ; 

edit.  L.  &  M.  quoted,  ii.  59. 

her  debt  to  the  Reformation, 

i.  168. 

Lutheran  Church  in,  i.   316- 

318;  Early  Fathers  of,  i.  316; 
unmistakably  Lutheran,  i.  318; 
decline  of  historical  Lutheran 
position,  i.  319;  unionism,  i. 
319-320;  her  growth  in  the 
faith,  ii.  53 ;  her  duty  to  her 
children,  ii.  57;  her  grand 
problem,  ii.  173. 

the   Confessions   and,   i.    167. 

168. 

American  Lutheran  Church ;  view 
of  Real  Presence,  Article 
quoted,  1.  162;  why  American? 
i.  166,  167;  vocation  of,  (S.  S. 
S.)  i.  339;  to  be  saved  by  Def. 


Platform,  i.  359;  defined  by 
C.  P.  K.,  ii.  105,  106;  lacks 
three  elements,  ii.  iii;  "quite 
ahead  of  medi?eval  fooleries;" 
odium  cast  on  reviving  church- 
liness  in  Reformed  circles,  ii. 

309. 

American  Lutheran  Church  vs. 
Ev.  Lutheran  Church  in 
America ;  from  edit.  L.  &  M., 
ii.  104-I12. 

American  Lutheranism  ;  a  "  mon- 
grel Methodistic  Presbyter- 
ianism,"  (Reynolds)  i.  179;  in 
its  genuine  sense,  i.  ^^7  \  "• 
2,7;  of  the  New  School,  i.  342; 
the  proposed  "  Protestant 
Confession,"  (S.  S.  S.)  i.  342; 
Necessity  of  a  Standard,  i. 
345 ;  true  and  false,  ii.  32 ; 
and  the  Lord's  Day,  ii.  119, 
120;  and  the  German  Reform- 
ed Church,  ii.  309. 

American  Lutheranism  Vindicated 
(S.  S.  S.)  i.  375.  ^tote. 

American  Philosophical  Society ; 
obituary  notice  of  C.  P.  K. 
(Dr.  F.  A.  Muehlenberg)  ii. 
395. 

Another  Victory  to  be  Won ;  from 
edit.  L.  &  M.,  ii.  74- 

Apology  for  our  Existence ;  from 
edit.  L.  &  Home  Journal,  ii. 
29. 

Apostolic     Method     of     Realizmg 
True  Ideal  of  Church,  (Sprech- 
er)    reviewed  by  C.   P.  K.,  ii. 
157-158. 

Apple ;  Rev  Thomas  G.,  urges  C. 
P.  K.  to  write  for  Mercers- 
burg  Rez'iezc,  ii.  315- 

Aquinas ;  hymn  quoted,  i.  157. 

Arndt's  True  Christianity  trans- 
lated ;  recommended  by  Gen. 
Synod   (1833)   i.  33 1- 

409 


4IO 


INDEX. 


Articles  of  C.  P.  K.  in  Observer, 
i.  35;  82;  121;  162;  list  of,  i. 
74,  75 ;  Articles  written  in 
Winchester,  i.  174;  in  Evan- 
gelical Review,  i.  173;  ii.  116; 
from  1854-1859,  i.  298;  in 
Missionary,  list  of,  i.  300-301 ; 
(cf.  i.  376)  ;  on  the  Gen. 
Synod,  (Miss.  1857)  i.  381, 
ff. ;  Doctrinal  Basis  of,  i.  385, 
ff. ;  Duty  of,  at  the  Present 
Crisis,  i.  402,  ff.  see  also  Luth- 
eran and   Missionary. 

Association ;  Lutheran,  for  News- 
paper and  Periodical  Publi- 
cation, its  organization,  ii.  32, 
34;   its   power  and  duties,   ii. 

47- 

Audin  quoted,  i.  125. 

Augsburg  Confession ;  A  Chron- 
icle of  the,  ii.  324,  and  note. 

the,  25th  Article  re- 
ferred to,  i.  76 ;  loth  Article 
in  the  Amer.  Luth.  Church,  i. 
163;  (cf.  i.  404,)  defense  and 
bibliography  of,  i.  302;  a  safe 
directory  (Gettysburg  Semi- 
nary, 1826)  i.  336;  this  refer- 
ence introduced  by  S.  S.  S., 
i-  337 ;  substantially  correct, 
S.  S.  S.)  i.  339;  amendment 
proposed,  (S.  S.  S.)  i.  342; 
"  normative  authority  "  sug- 
gested, i.  345 ;  7th  Article 
misused,  i.  355 ;  A  Plea 
for,  (Dr.  Mann)  i.  361;  the 
Church's  duty  toward,  (C. 
Ph.  K.)  i.  369;  upheld  by 
Pittsburgh  Synod,  (1856)  i. 
37^-379  \  the  Symbol  of  Luth- 
eran Catholicity,  i.  387 ;  the 
loth  Article  and  the  Gen. 
Synod's  Formula  of  Doctrine, 
(C.  P.  K.)  i.  404:  Preface 
quoted  (opinions  of  diverse 
parties')  ii.  80;  and  the  Sab- 
bath Question,  ii.  116,  117, 
122. 

Augustan  Age;  the,  i.  loi. 

Authority  of  Synods,  ii.  170-171 ; 
173- 


Bachmann;  Rev.,  supply  at  Can- 
ton, Baltimore,  i.  45. 

Baker;  Henry  S.,  (brother-in- 
law)  letter  to,  i.  239. 

Jacob,    (father-in-law)   letter 

to,    i.    221  ;    his    hospitality,    i. 
271. 

Virginia,     (second    wife)     i. 

270 ;  letter  to,  i.  273. 

William  B.,  (brother-in-law) 

letter  to,  i.  260. 

Baltimore  Convention;  (Missions 
of  Gen.  Synod  1852)  Nine 
Sj^nods  represented ;  C.  P.  K. 
quoted,  i.  195. 

pastorate    of    C.    P.    K.    see 

under    Krauth,    Charles    Por- 
terfield. 

Barker ;  Wharton,  ii.  399. 
Bassler;    Rev.    G.,    President    of 

Reading   Convention,    ii.    174; 

and    of    General    Council,    ii. 

177- 

Baugher;  Rev.  H.  L.,  teacher  in 
Gettysburg  Gymnasium,  i.  28, 
27;  Professor  in  Pennsylvania 
College,  i.  29;  ordination  ad- 
dress, i.  no;  "Abstract"  of 
Maryland  Synod,  i.  in;  the 
"  Pacific  Overture,"  i.  362 ; 
Committee  of  West  Penna. 
Synod,  ii.   168. 

Bear;  Col.,  of  Hagerstown,  i.  52. 

Beates ;  Henrv,  ii.  399. 

Beaumont  and  Fletcher ;  Motto 
for  Catalogue  of  C.  P.  K.'s 
library,  i.  70. 

Becourt ;  Count,  i.  3. 

Bee  and  the  Ant ;  the,  ii.  263. 

Berkeley's  Principles,  ii.  270, 
note:  271. 

Bible  a  Perfect  Book ;  the,  quoted, 

'■  73..  . 

Revision ;  American  Commit- 
tee organized  1871,  Dr.  Philip 
Schaff  Chairman ;  C.  P.  K. 
member  of  Old  Testament 
Revision  Company,  ii.  331  ; 
his  work  (Dr.  Schaff 's  tri- 
bute) ii.  331-332;  Excellence 
of     King     James's     Version, 


INDEX. 


411 


Bible  Revision;  Continued: 

(from  article.  C.  P.  K.)  ii. 
aZ',  the  Revised  Version, 
(review,  C.  P.  K.)  ii.  335. 

the,  the  nurse  of  freedom,  i. 

128;  and  the  bibliomaniac,  ii. 
285. 

Bibles;  C.  P.  K.'s  collection  of.  ii. 
298. 

Bibliothcca  Sacra ;  Prof.  Moses 
Stuart  on  the  Real  Presence, 
i.  114-115;  117.  (cf.  Stuart); 
notice  of  Conservative  Re- 
formation,   ii.    304. 

Bird ;  Rev.  F.  M.,  connected  with 
L.  &  M.,  ii.  52. 

Bittinger;  Rev.  J.  B.,  C.  P.  K.  in 
college,  i.  31. 

Bittle ;  Mrs.  Louisa,  (aunt)  i.  5. 

Rev.  David  F.,  President  of 

Roanoke   College,  i.   5. 

Black ;  George,  assists  in  publish- 
ing Conservative  Reforma- 
tion,  ii.  301. 

■"  Blatter  aus  dem  Wanderbuche." 
Dr.    W.    J.    Mann,    quoted,    i. 

354- 
Blind,  happier  tlian  the  Deaf  and 

Dumb;  the,  i.  212. 
Bloomerism ;  mock  defense  of,  ii. 

21. 
B.  M.  S.— Dr.  Beale  M.  Schmuck- 

er. 
Bomberger ;  Rev.  Dr.,  proposes  to 

C.    P.    K.    work    on    Herzog's 

Encycl.  i.   312. 
Books ;  the  love  of,  i.   189. 

two  classes  of.  ii.  282. 

Boy's  appetite  for  reading,  i.  38. 
Brandt ;     Rev.     Alex.,     pastor     in 

Santa  Cruz.  i.  218. 

Breckenridge ;  Rev.  S.  F.,  ii.  177. 

Brobst ;  Rev.  S.  K.,  his  desire  for 
seminary,  ii.  139;  delegate 
Gen.  Syn.  Fort  Wayne,  ii.  157. 

Broken  English  vs.  broken  pro- 
mises, i.  267. 

Brown ;  Rev.  J.  A.,  in  East  Penna. 
Synod  moves  rejection  of 
Definite  Platform,  i.  360; 
signs  Pacific  Overture,  i.  362 ; 


attacks  Dr.  S.  S.  S.,  i.  410; 
elected  as  a  compromise,  to 
succeed  S.  S.  S.  in  Gettysb.,  ii. 
140,  note;  controversy  with 
C.  P.  K.  over  doctr.  position 
of  two  Seminaries,  ii.  146;  on 
Committee  of  W.  Penna.  Syn., 
ii.  168;  rejected  as  delegate 
by  N.  Y.  Syn.,  ii.  169;  witness 
for  Gen.  Syn..  in  congrega- 
tional litigation,  ii.  176,  177; 
the  Gettysb.  Professors'  oath 
under  cross-examination,  ii. 
177;  Conservative  Reforma- 
tion misrepresented,  ii.  303 ; 
controversy  with  C.  P.  K.  at 
First  Free  Diet,  ii.  324,  325; 
C.  P.  K.'s  sympathy  in  his 
affliction ;  his  death,  ii.  326. 

Bulwer  contrasted  with  Dickens, 
ii.  347 ;  his  early  and  later 
works,  ii.  348. 

Burke's  ambitious  wish,  i.  36, 
note. 

Burkhalter  Professorship,  ii.  141. 

Burning  of  the  Old  Church  on  the 
Hill,  (sermon  quoted)  i. 
265.  flF. 

Byron;  hatred  of  Horace,  quoted, 
i.  2>Z<  41  ;  contrasted  with  Bul- 
wer, ii.  348. 

Caes.\r  and  God ;  see  Politics  and 
Religion. 

Calvin;  a  gigantic  mind,  i.  124; 
his  interpretation  of  Scrip- 
ture, i.  134;  signed  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  ii.  95. 

Canada ;  Synod  of,  represented  at 
Reading  convention,  ii.   174. 

Canton ;  C.  P.  K.'s  first  charge,  i. 
43 ;  conditions  in,  i.  44 ;  45 ; 
59;  pastoral  work  in.  i.  47; 
50;  53;  56;  a  pastoral  visit  in, 
i.  48;  "conciliating  the  Uni- 
versalists,"  i.  49.  50. 

Carlstadt  a   fanatic,  i.   133. 

"  Castles  of  theory  on  foundations 
of   fog,"   ii.  61. 

Catechism,  basis  for  a  popular 
theology,    i.    184. 


412 


INDEX. 


Catechisms,  concerning  the  Lord's 
Day;  Large,  ii.  121;  Small, 
ii.  122 ;  of  Council  of  Trent, 
ii.  117;  Westminster,  ii.  122. 

Cathedrals  and  churches ;  Chester, 
ii-  369;  371;  Durham;  Peter- 
boro;  St.  Paul's;  York,  ii. 
^72 ;  English  cathedrals  and 
Milton,  ii.  371 ;  tone  of  the 
preaching,  ii.  272 ;  Westmin- 
ster Abbey,  ii.  2,72. 

Catholicism  and  Romanism,  i.  68. 

"  Charlie  "  in  West  Indies,  i.  227 ; 
234 ;  254 ;  letter  from,  i.  243. 

Ch.   B.— Church  Book. 

Chemnitz's  Loci ;  influence  on  C. 
P.  K.,  i.   160. 

Chester;  Dean  of,  see  Howson. 

Christian  Liberty;  (two  sermons) 
Maintained,  quoted,  ii.  5-9; 
Defended,  ii.  9-12 ;  misused  by 
radicals,  ii.  16. 

Sabbath ;    Divine    obligation 

of,  see  Lord's  Day. 

Chrysostom ;  address  to  Alumni 
of  Gettysburg  Sem.,  {Ev. 
Revieiv)    quoted,  i.    158-160. 

Church  and  its  members ;  the,  ii. 
II. 

Book;  features  of,  antici- 
pated in  report  of  C.  P.  K. 
and  B.  M.  S.  to  Va.  Synod,  i. 
155;  work  of  the  Committee; 
C.  P.  K.'s  active  part  in,  ii. 
190;  his  work  on  Special  Col- 
lects, ii.  191. 

Development    on    Apostolic 

Principles;  (S.  S.  S.,  Ev.  Re- 
viezv)  quoted,  i.  345. 

Fellowship  Question  in  Gene- 
ral Council,  ii.  195,  ff. ;  dis- 
turbed Synodical  and  personal 
relations,  ii.  196;  C.  P.  K.'s 
position  traced  in  its  logical 
sequence,  ii.  197 ;  the  future 
of  Protestantism  involved;  C. 
P.  K.'s  position  at  Pittsburgh 
convention  of  G.  C,  ii.  199; 
exchange  of  pulpits,  ii.  200; 
(cf.  i.  222)  the  Iowa  rule 
"  would  simplify  the  question," 


ii.  201 ;  the  only  consistent 
position,  ii.  204 ;  Galesburg 
Rule  the  "  riper  affirmation  of 
principles  involved  from  the 
beginning,"  ii.  210;  views  of 
German   theologians,   ii.    233. 

Paper;  the  ideal,  ii.  45. 

Papers ;  Individual  and  Offi- 
cial, Edit.  L  &  M.,  ii.  46,  47. 

Polity ;  Fundamental  Princi- 
ples of.  Theses  by  C.  P.  K. ; 
discussed  at  Reading  conven- 
tion ;  basis  of  G.  C.'s  Consti- 
tution, ii.  174. 

in  America ;  Our,  Arti- 
cles, L.  &  M.,  ii.  170. 
Civil  War ;  the,  ii.  59,  ff. 
Classics  and  Modern  Literature,  i. 

39- 
Clerical  Robes,  see  Gown. 
Cline ;  Rev.  J.  P.,  signs  license  of 

C.  P.  K,  i.  43. 
Cobia    family,    Charleston,    S.    C, 

i.  151- 
Coburg;  castle  of,  ii.  375,  27^- 
College  Days,  i.  36. 

of   Philadelphia ;   see   Smithy 

Dr.  Wm. 

students  classified,  i.  41. 

"  Combativeness  without  destruc- 
tiveness,"   ii.    78. 

Commentaries,   (C.  Ph.  K.)   i.  58. 

"  Common  sense  only  good  for 
common  things,"  ii.  83. 

Concord ;  Formula  of,  on  Elec- 
tion, ii.  331. 

Confessions ;  Oecumenical  and 
particular,  ii.   199;  202. 

the,  {see  also  Augsburg  Con- 
fession) C.  P.  K.'s  relation  to,^ 
i.  72;  157;  160,  (B.  M.  S.)  ; 
167 ;  their  relation  to  Refor- 
mation   (Ev.  Review)    i.    166; 

Congregational  singing;  deteriora- 
tion deplored,   (1848)  i.  331. 

Congregations ;  Constitution  for, 
work  in  G.  C. :  different  posi- 
tion taken  by  C.  P.  K.,  and  B. 
M.  S.,  ii.  192;  discussion  of 
Scriptural    offices    in    congre- 


INDEX. 


413 


Congregations ;    Constitution    for, 
Continued: 
gation;    C.    P.    K.'s    position 
finally  approved  by  G.  C,  ii. 

193- 

"  Connivance  at  error,  intolerance 
towards  truth,"  ii.  90;  i.  419. 

Conrad  ;  Rev.  F.  W.,  preaching  in 
Washington,  i.  151;  letter 
quoted,  ii.  48;  on  Committee 
of  W.  Penna.  Synod,  ii.  168; 
reads  paper  at  First  Free  ' 
Diet,    ii.    3^5- 

Rev.  V.  L.,  i.  214. 

Conservative  Reformation  and  its 
Theolog>',  1871 ;  C.  P.  K.'s 
Magnum  Opus;  its  original 
plan  sketched,  ii.  299 ;  topics 
proposed,  ii.  300;  "the  harvest 
of  years  of  labor  "  ;  dedicated 
to  memory  of  C.  Ph.  K.,  ii. 
301  ;  its  plan  as  modified  for 
publication,  ii.  302 ;  its  com- 
posite character  misused,  ii. 
303 ;  recognized  as  the  stand- 
ard English  work  on  the 
Lutheran  Church,  ii.  303 ;  let- 
ters :  from  Dr.  C.  F.  Schaef- 
f er,  ii.  304 ;  from  Dr.  G.  F. 
Krotel,  ii.  305 ;  from  Dr.  C. 
E.  Luthardt,  ii.  311;  reviews 
quoted :  Dr.  C.  Rene  Gregory, 
ii.  304;  Mcrccrsburg  Rcviezc, 
(Dr.  Jacobs),  ii.  306;  Re- 
formcd  Messenger,  (Dr. 
Nevin),  ii.  307;  "a  thesaurus 
of  information ;"  a  challenge 
to  all  non-Lutheran  Protes- 
tants, ii.  308 ;  its  value  to 
Protestantism,  ii.  310;  edi- 
torial indifference  of  L.  &  M., 
ii.  312;  appreciative  article  in 
L.  Observer  (Dr.  Swartz),  ii. 
313;  Infant  Baptism  and  the 
Calvinistic  System,  {q.  v.)  ii. 
314- 

'■'  Consistency  of  the  acorn  is  de- 
velopment into  the  oak,"  ii. 
220. 

'Constitution  for  congregations ; 
see  Congregations,  Const,  for. 


Controversy ;  on  private  com- 
munion, i.  75 ;  against  Amer. 
Lutheranism,  ii.  yy,  ff. ;  in  its 
own  nature  not  unfriendly, 
ii-  77  \  319- 

Cookman;  Rev.  Alfred,  of  Pitts- 
burgh, i.  288. 

Rev.    Mr.,    Methodist    local 

preacher,  ii.  2. 

Country;  Our,  sec  Our  Country. 

church,    in    Old    Virginia,    i. 

209. 

C.      P.      K.— Charles      Porterfield 

Krauth. 
C.  Ph.  K. — Cliarles  Philip  Krauth. 

"  Daily  papers  ....  the  grandest 
epic  of  the  ages,"  ii.  294. 

D'Aubigne;  Merle,  Calvin  and 
Luther  compared,  quoted,  i. 
134- 

Deaf  and  Dumb  Asylum,  Staun- 
ton, Va.,  i.  210. 

Definite  Platform;  the,  (1855)  a 
confession  without  a  confes- 
sor, i.  357 ;  "  an  anonymous 
pamphlet,"  i.  360;  361  ;  author- 
ship avowed  later,  i.  357;  to 
be  received  unaltered,  i.  358; 
analysis  of ;  comparison  with 
Augsburg  (Confession,  i.  358; 
its  reception,  i.  359 ;  con- 
demned by  Ev.  Revicxv,  i.  360; 
rejected  by  East  Penna. 
Synod,  i.  360;  refuted  by  Dr. 
Mann,  i.  361 ;  accepted  by 
various  bodies,  i.  359;  412; 
opposed  by  C.  Ph.  K.  (L. 
Observer'),  i.  7,y7,;  defended 
by  S.  S.  S.,  i.  375  ;  Dr.  Kurtz's 
relation  to,  ii.  86;  testimony 
of  Pittsb.  Synod  against,  i.  ;iyy ; 
ii-  133;  T38;  the  Christian 
Sabbath,  ii.  120.  note. 

Delitzsch  on  Church  Fellowship, 
ii-  ^i?- 

Demme;  Dr.  C.  R.,  tribute  by  C. 
Ph.  K.,  i.  10;  eminent  in 
Homiletics,  i.  ir;  early  work 
toward  theological  seminary, 
ii-  139- 


414 


INDEX. 


Dickens ;  Bulwer  and,  ii.  347 ; 
Dickens'  Letters,  ii.  349;  his 
greatness  and  littleness,  ii. 
350,  351. 

Diehl;  Rev.  G.,  Editor  of  Ob- 
server, ii.  30 ;  takes  stock  in 
Lutheran  and  Missionary,  ii.  33. 

Diet ;  First  Free,  1877.  Convenes 
in  St.  Matthew's  Phila.,  ii. 
324 ;  the  Language  Question  ; 
C.  P.  K.  quoted,  i.  171  ;  Dr.  J. 
A.  Brown's  assaults  on  C.  P. 
K. ;  a  question  of  chronology, 

V-  .325- 

Discipline;  College,  relation  of 
parental  authority  to;  letter 
from  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  253,  254; 
University  law  must  be  su- 
preme, ii.  255. 

Divine  Truth ;  edit.  L.  &  M., 
quoted,   ii.   5s. 

Dobler ;  George,  and  the  Seminary 
Library,  ii.  146;  Luther  Bio- 
graphy, ii.  362. 

J.   W.    B.,   plans   C.    P.    K.'s 

trip   abroad,   ii.   363 ;   meeting, 
in  Mayence,  ii.  366. 

Doctrinal  difficulties,  i.  y2>  \  faced 
and  overcome,  i.    156. 

Documents;  object  and  value  of, 
ii.  loi. 

Dogmatik ;   Schmid's.  see  Schmid. 

Doll;  Katherine,  (grandmother) 
i.  2. 

Maria,  i.  2. 

Dull    (Doll)    family,   Philadelphia. 

i.  27. 
"  Dumb  watch  among  thinkers,"  ii. 

114. 
Duncan ;  Dr.,  of  Baltimore,  i.  97 ; 

99- 

Dr.   John,   of   Edinburgh,   in 

St.  Thomas,  i.  242,  note. 

E.-kST  Pennsylvania  Synod;  or- 
ganization (1842)  ;  relations 
with  Penna.  Synod,  ii.  25-27 ; 
rejects  Definite  Platform,  i. 
360;  endorses  address  of 
West  Penna.  Synod  condemn- 
ing Penna.  Ministerium,  ii.  168. 


"  Easy    writing    is    terribly    hard 

reading,"  ii.  345. 
Ecclesiastical     Standards,     (Lint- 

ner)   quoted,  i.  355. 
Edinburgh ;     beauty     of ;     Roslyn 

Chapel;  Castle,  ii.  370,  371. 
Editor  and  Preacher,  Edit.  L.   & 

M.,  ii.  39. 
Editor's  life ;  the,  ii.  84. 
Ehrenfeld;   Rev.  G.  F.,  ii.   177. 
Eichelberger ;  Rev.  L.,  i.  80. 
Elders     and     Deacons     in     Luth. 

Church     since     Muehlenberg's 

time,    ii.    193 ;    usage    adopted 

from    Reformed    and     Presb. 

churches,  ii.   193-194. 

Lay ;  a  modern  invention,  ii. 

195,   see   Congregations,   Con- 
stitution for. 

Teaching  and  Ruling,  differ- 
ent views  of  C.  P.  K.  and  B. 
M.  S. ;  the  latter  supported  by 
prominent  Luth.  theologians ; 
C.  P.  K.'s  view  finally  approv- 
ed by  G.  C,  ii.  193 ;  article  on, 
quoted,  ii.  194. 

Election;  the  doctrine  of.  ii.  328- 

Endress ;  Rev.  C,  a  founder  of 
Gen.  Synod,  i.  343. 

Ernest ;  Rev.  J.  A.,  ii.  177. 

Error ;  three  stages  in  progress  of, 
ii.  89 ;  166. 

Europe;  C.  P.  K.'s  trip  to,  1880; 
necessary  for  his  work  on 
Luther  Biography ;  action  of 
friends,  ii.  363 ;  difficulties 
cleared  away,  ii.  364 ;  embarks 
June  26th ;  lands  in  Queens- 
town,  ii.  365;  outline  of 
itinerary,  ii.  365-367:  extracts 
from  letters :  England  and 
Ireland,  ii.  368;  the  first  week, 
ii.  369 ;  London ;  the  Tower, 
ii.  Ti?'^  '•  Scotland  ;  Edinburgh, 
i^-  370;  371;  renewing  his 
youth,  ii.  370;  Augsburg,  ii. 
375 ;  Nuernberg,  ii.  372-373 ; 
Coburg,  ii.  375;  Leipzig;  Ber- 
lin, ii.  374;  re-embarks.  Ant- 
werp,  Sept.  25th.  ii.  375;  367. 


I 


INDEX. 


415 


Evangelical  Review ;  established 
1849,  i.  12;  a  power  for  con- 
servative Luthcranism,  i.  13; 
C.  P.  K.'s  interest  in;  "fac- 
tious and  fanatical  opposi- 
tion" to,  i.  175;  letters  from 
Dr.  Reynolds,  i.  175,  ff. ;  sec 
also  Correspondence  under 
Krauth,  Charles  Porterfield ; 
Articles  by  C.  P.  K.,  i.  173; 
178;  257,  }iote;  261  ;  298;  303; 
Dr.  Reynolds  gratified,  i.  178- 
179;  Review  "killed  dead"  by 
Old  Lutheranism  (Kurtz),  i. 
179;  must  be  sustained,  i.  207, 
note;  258;  C.  P.  K.'s  sugges- 
tions for  improvement,  i.  307 ; 
themes  proposed,  i.  309;  worth 
more  than  money,  i.  311; 
partly  the  organ  of  conserva- 
tives, i.  348 ;  condemns  Defin- 
ite Platform,  i.  360. 

Everett's  Oration  at  Gettysb.  Na- 
tional Cemetery,  ii.  71. 

Ewald ;  Susanna,  i.  2. 

Extempore  preaching,  i.  62 ;  in  St. 
Thomas,  i.  252. 

Eyster ;  Rev.  W.  P.,  ordained  with 
C.    P.    K.,   i.    no. 

Faith  ;  Fundamental  Principles 
of,  Theses  by  C.  P.  K.,  dis- 
cussed at  Reading  convention  ; 
basis  of  G.  C.'s  constitution, 
ii.  174. 

Fathers ;  the,  worthy  of  close 
study,  i.  159;  described  by 
Dr.  Kurtz  {Observer),  i.  344; 
his  view  criticised,  i.  356. 

Faust ;  the  art  of,  its  probable 
origin,  ii.  84. 

Fellowship ;  Church,  sec  Church 
Fellowship. 

Fifth  Year  of  its  Life;  quoted 
from  edit.  L.  &  M.,  ii.  51,  ff. 

First  Best  Thing  for  our  Country ; 
from  edit.  L.  &  M.,  ii.  70. 

Fleming's  Vocabulary  of  Philo- 
sophy, ii.  268,  note. 

Forbearing  One  another  in  Love ; 
from  edit.  L.  &  M.,  ii.  79. 


Former  Days  and  these ;  the, 
Thanksgiving      Discourse,      i. 

299; 
Forster's  Life  of  Dickens;  one  of 
the  most  melancholy  of  books, 

ii-  351- 

Fort  Wayne;  see.  Gen.  Synod, 
1866,  and  Gen.  Council,  1867. 

Fraley,  Hon.  Frederick,  submits 
plan  for  re-organizing  Uni- 
versity to  C.  P.  K. ;  letter 
from  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  255-256; 
last    letter    to    C.    P.    K.,    ii. 

395- 

Franckean  Synod ;  organization 
(1837)  and  position;  its 
standing  legally  defined,  ii. 
129;  disapproved  of,  by  Gen. 
Syn.,  i.  331  ;  applies  for  ad- 
mission (York),  ii.  128;  Dr. 
Pohlman's  Comm.  report,  ii. 
129;  debate  characterized  by 
C.  P.  K.,  ii.  130;  delegates  ad- 
mitted, ii.  131  ;  action  of 
Penna.  delegation,  ii.  131,  132 
and  note. 

Franklin ;  Benjamin,  plans  for 
educating  youth  in  Penna.,  ii. 
250;  member  of  first  Board  of 
University,  ii.  251. 

Fraternal  Address ;  quoted,  ii.  164- 
167 ;  its  reception  by  Synods, 
ii.  167. 

Free  Conference  vs.  general 
Church  organization,  ii.  175. 

Friederici ;  E.  T.  H.,  Principal  of 
preparatory  department,  Get- 
tysb. Gymnasium,  i.  28;  37; 
teacher  of  German,   i.  33. 

Fritschel ;  Rev.  Sigmund,  C.  P.  K. 
and  the  Confessions  (Kircli- 
lichc  Zeitschrift)  i.  72;  repre- 
sents Iowa  Synod  at  Akron,  ii. 
204;  letter  to  C.  P.  K. ;  the 
language  question,  ii.  232-233. 

Fry ;  Rev.  Jacob,  Pastor  in  Read- 
ing; accompanied  C.  P.  K. 
abroad ;  sketches  of  the  trip, 
ii-  365,  366 ;  rest  or  unrest,  ii. 
367 ;  "  a  very  nice  companion," 
ii.   368. 


4i6 


INDEX. 


Fuerst's  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  Dic- 
tionary,  i.   71. 

Fullerton ;  Dr.  George  S.,  Profes- 
sor in  University  of  Penna. ; 
describes  C.  P.  K.  among  his 
students,  ii.  259. 

Fundamental  Doctrines ;  defined 
by  C.  P.  K.,  i.  389,  ff. ;  growth 
in  his  conviction  concerning, 
ii.  112. 

Furness;  Dr.  Horace  Howard,  ii. 
399- 

Galesburg  Rule  ;  action  of  Swed- 
ish Augustana  Synod,  ii.  204; 
Dr.  Ruperti's  propositions ; 
text  of  the  Rule,  ii.  205 ;  its  ef- 
fect on  the  Church  ;  understood 
in  two  ways,  ii.  206;  J.  A.  S. 
and  the  Rule,  ii.  206-207 ;  the 
Rule  explained  by  C.  P.  K.,  ii. 
210;  "pastoral  regulations" 
or  "  confessional  principle,"  ii. 
219-220;  action  of  District 
Synods,  ii.  221 ;  C.  P.  K.'s 
105  Theses  before  G.  C. ;  24 
Propositions  of  J.  A.  S.,  ii. 
222;  correspondence  of  C.  P. 
K.  concerning  the  Rule,  ii.  224, 
ff. ;  Galesburg  and  First  Coun- 
cil of  Nice,  ii.  232. 

G.    C. — General    Council. 

Geissenhainer ;  Rev.  F.  W.,  pastor 
in  Montgomery  Co.,  i.  2 ;  a 
founder  of  Gen.  Synod,  i.  343. 

General  Council ;  the,  first  steps 
in  Ministerium  of  Penna.,  ii. 
164;  Fraternal  address  issued, 
ii.  164-167;  its  reception  by 
the  Synods,  ii.  167-169;  the 
Reading  Convention  (1866),  ii. 
^72)'<  Synods  represented; 
Theses  of  C.  P.  K.  on  Funda- 
mental Principles  of  Faith, 
and  of  Church  Polity,  ii.  174; 
position  of  Missouri  and  Nor- 
wegian Synods ;  Free  Confer- 
ence or  General  Church-or- 
ganization? ii.  175;  the  privi- 
lege of  debate;  outline  of  Con- 
stitution    adopted,     ii.      176; 


effect  of  rupture  with  Gen. 
Synod  on  local  congregations ; 
litigation  over  church  pro- 
perty; ii.  176-177;  First  Con- 
vention, Fort  Wayne  (1867)  ; 
C.  P.  K.'s  opening  sermon: 
the  General  Council,  its  Diffi- 
culties and  Encouragements, 
ii.  183;  Order  of  Service  (Ch. 
B.)  discussed,  ii.  191-192; 
Constitution  for  congregations 
recommended  to  Council 
(1875);  minority  report  by 
Dr.  B.  M.  Schmucker,  ii.  192; 
cf.  Congregations,  Constitu- 
tion for.  Church  Fellowship 
question  in  Gen.  Council ;  re- 
quest of  Iowa  Synod  concern- 
ing (1867),  ii.  195;  its  effect 
in  the  body ;  the  doctrinal 
basis  of  the  G.  C.  at  stake,  ii. 
196;  discussion  at  Pittsburgh 
(1868)  ;  report  of  Comm.  (C. 
P.  K.  chairman)  adopted;  ii. 
198 ;  western  synods  not  satis- 
fied ;  Wisconsin  Syn.  with- 
draws; the  Minnesota  ques- 
tion (Chicago,  1869),  ii.  202; 
report  on  Fundamental  error- 
ists  (Lancaster,  O.,  1870)  not 
representing  views  of  C.  P. 
K. ;  withdrawal  of  Minnesota 
and  Illinois  Synods,  ii.  203 ; 
Akron,  O.,  (1872)  Iowa  Synod 
renews  its  request ;  G.  C. 
urged  to  adopt  C.  P.  K.'s  de- 
claration as  its  official  state- 
ment ;  the  Lancaster  declara- 
tion as  defined  in  Akron,  ii. 
204 ;  Dr.  Ruperti's  proposi- 
tions (Galesburg,  Ills.,  1875) 
lead  to  adoption  of  Galesburg 
Rule,  q.  v.;  text  of  the  Rule, 
ii.  205;  C.  P.  K.'s  official  de- 
claration, ii.  205-206;  G.  C. 
misrepresented  by  Synodical 
Conference ;  misunderstood  by 
Missouri  Synod,  ii.  219;  Beth- 
lehem, Pa.,  (1876)  action  of 
eight  district  synods  on 
Galesb.  Rule  reported,  ii.  220; 


INDEX. 


417 


General  Council;  Continued: 

C.  P.  K.  ordered  to  prepare 
Theses  on  Rule,  ii.  222;  Phila- 
delphia, (1877)  ;  discussion 
begins,  on  105  Theses  on  the 
Galesb.  Declaration  on  Pulpit 
and  Altar  Fellowship,  ii.  222; 
243;  J.  A.  S.  publishes  24 
Propositions  on  the  Rule, 
claiming  to  present  true  posi- 
tion of  G.  C.,  ii.  222 ;  official 
character  of  C.  P.  K.'s  utter- 
ance, ii.  223 ;  opening  sermon, 
(C.  P.  K.)  Religion  and  Reli- 
gionisms; discussion  of 
Theses;  Drs.  Seiss  and  Kun- 
kleman  lead  the  opposition,  ii. 
244;  Zanesville,  O.,  (1879); 
last  meeting  attended  by  C.  P. 
K. ;  he  submits  design  for  seal 
adopted  by  G.  C. ;  discussion 
of  105  Theses  continued,  ii. 
246 ;  Dr.  Krotel's  position ; 
warns  against  hasty  action ;  C. 
P.  K.  declares  Theses  prepar- 
ed for  discussion  only  ii.  247; 
review  of  C.  P.  K.'s  work  in 
G.  C.,  ii.  189. 

General  Councils  ;  abuse  of,  ii.  186. 

General  Synod;  the  Charac- 
teristics: "  an  honest  effort  " 
to  preserve  the  Church,  i.  320 ; 
"  an  offspring  of  reviving 
Lutheranism,"  i.  320;  383;  or- 
ganizes educational  and  mis- 
sion work,  i.  330;  societies 
founded  by,  i.  330;  Luther's 
"  peculiar  views  "  abandoned 
by  majority,  i.  333;  funda- 
mental doctrines  rejected  by 
many,  ii.  114;  never  sub- 
scribed to  articles  on  Abuses, 
ii.  116;  inconsistency  of  posi- 
tion, i.  348 ;  three  classes  of 
men  in,  i.  397,  398;  ii.  136;  its 
formula  of  doctrine  ambi- 
guous, i.  402;  influence  of  its 
"middle  party,"  ii.  137;  how 
used  in  case  of  Franckean 
Sj'nod,  ii.  138;  how  the  Pitts- 
burgh resolutions  were  modi- 

27 


fied,  ii.  138;  a  voluntary  con- 
federation, ii.  75 ;  no  longer  a 
general  body,  ii.  165. 
Chronology: 

1818.  First  proposed  by 
Penna.    Synod    (Harrisburg), 

i.  323- 

1819.  Plan  for  general  body 
discussed   (Baltimore),  i.  323. 

1820.  Organized  in  Hagcrs- 
town,  i.  324;  two  currents  in, 
i-  327,  330;  Founders  of,  i. 
343;  ii.  98;  Constitution  of, 
i.  329 ;  it  ignores  Lutheran 
standards,  i.  S33 ;  343 ;  claims 
right  to  revise  confession  of 
faith,  i.  335. 

1821.  First  regular  conven- 
tion,  (Frederick,  Md.)   i.  324. 

1823.  Withdrawal  of  Penna. 
Synod,  i.  324 ;  and  Synod  of 
New  York,  i.  338. 

1825.  Theological  Seminary 
established,  i.  336,  339;  recog- 
nition of  Augsb.  Confession, 
i-  338 ;  388 ;  such  subscription 
"a  solemn  farce,"  (C.  Ph.  K.) 
i.  370 ;  403. 

1839.  Disapproves        of 

Franckean  Synod,  i.  331. 

1841.  A  Life  of  Luther  ap- 
pointed to  be  written,  i.  331. 

1842.  Adopts  German  Li- 
turgy' of  Penna.  Synod,  i.  350. 

1845.  Unionism;  relations 
with  Reformed  and  Presby- 
terian Churches,  i.  333. 

1847.  Publishes  translation 
of  Penna.  Synod's  Liturgy,  i. 

154- 

1848.  Endorses  "  Apostolic 
Prot.   Union "  of   S.   S.   S.,  i. 

333. 

1850.  Convention  in  Char- 
leston, S.  C,  i.  151;  opening 
sermon,  the  Lutheran  Church 
in  America  (C.  Ph.  K.) 
quoted,   i.   365.   ff. ;   403. 

1853.  Return  of  Penna. 
Synod,  (Winchester,  Va.)  i. 
349- 


4i8 


INDEX. 


General  Synod;  Continued: 

1855.  Convention  in  Day- 
ton, O.,  i.  354;  Definite  Plat- 
form, i.  356;  raises  storm,  i. 
360,  361. 

1856.  Pacific  Overture,  i. 
362. 

1857.  Convention  in  Read- 
ing anxiously  awaited,  i.  379; 
impossible  to  satisfy  both 
sides,  i.  380;  compromise  pro- 
posed on  basis  of  C.  P.  K.'s 
articles  on  Gen.  Synod,  i.  409. 

1859.  Pittsburgh  conven- 
tion ;  admission  of  Melanch- 
thon  Synod,  i.  411,  412;  C.  P. 
K.'s  position,  412,  413. 

1864.  Convention  in  York, 
Pa.,  ii.  127;  diverse  counsel 
(L.  &  M.,  and  Observer)  ii. 
127,  128;  application  of 
Franckean  Synod,  ii.  128;  Dr. 
Pohlman's  report  approved 
by  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  129;  a  "  crisis" 
in  Gen.  Synod,  from  edit.  L. 
&  M.,  ii.  130;  admission  of 
Franckean  Synod;  protest  by 
Penna.  delegation,  ii.  131 ; 
signed  by  other  delegates ; 
Penna.  delegation  withdraws, 
ii.  132 ;  Constitution  unsatis- 
factory; Dr.  Pohlman's  pro- 
posed amendment ;  action  of 
Pittsburgh  Synod  on  Definite 
Platform  partly  adopted,  ii. 
133;  cf.  i.  2i77',  this  course 
approved  by  Observer,  ii.  133; 
and  bv  Penna.  Synod,  ii.  134; 
138. 

1865.  Amendment  of  doc- 
trinal basis  rejected  by  four 
synods,  ii.  135;  adopted  by, 
eighteen,  ii.   136. 

1866.  Convention  in  Fort 
Wayne,  Ind.,  ii.  157-160;  list 
of  delegates  from  Penna. 
Synod,  ii.  157;  their  creden- 
tials refused,  ii.  159;  a  pre- 
concerted program,  ii.  155, 
156;  decision  sustained  by 
majority;      delegation      with- 


draws ;  Dr.  Passavant's  pro- 
test, ii.  160;  final  withdrawal 
of  Penna.  Synod,  ii.  161 ;  this 
action  misrepresented,  ii.  162; 
168. 

General  Synod ;  the.  Formation  of, 
(Dr.  Krotel)  i.  321-326;  Theo- 
logical Characteristics  of  the 
Era  of  its  Formation  (C.  P. 
K.)  i.  326,  ff . ;  Doctrinal  Basis 
of.  Interpreted  by  its  Leaders, 
i.  Z32,  ff.;  by  S.  S.  S.,  i.  2,^7; 
by  C.  P.  K.  (article)  i.  385, 
ff. ;  Her  Name  and  her  Foun- 
ders  (C.  P.  K.)   ii.  96. 

General  Synod  ;  the.  Three  Articles 
on,    C.    P.    K.    in   Missionary , 

1857,    i-    381-409- 
German      language ;      the,      great 

treasures     in,     (C.     Ph.     K.) 

i.  88;  importance  of,   (C.  Ph. 

K.)  i.  106. 

people ;  the,  ii.  379 ;  380. 

Germany ;  Future  of  Luth.  Church 

in,  ii.  312. 

Luther's,  ii.  378. 

Gertier ;  Dr.,  i.  3. 

Gettysburg;    C.    P.    K.'s    fondness 

for,  i.  59;  preaching  in,  i.  60; 
dedication  of  National  Ceme- 
tery, ii.  71,  y2. 

Quarterly    Review,    refuses 

Dr.  Jacobs'  article  on  Con- 
servative Reformation,  ii.  306. 

Seminary  in,  founded  1825,  i. 

336  ;  388 ;  the  "  Abstract  "  of 
Maryland  Synod  represented 
its  teaching,  (  S.  S.  S.  c.  1850), 
i.  114;  C.  P.  K.  thought  of  for 
second  Professorship,  i.  149, 
182 ;  his  own  feeling,  i.  183 ; 
his  love  for  his  Alma  Mater, 
ii.  146,  147. 

Gibbons ;    his    "  silly    sophism,"    i. 

40. 
Gilbert ;   Dr.   David,   Professor  in 

Penna.    College,    i.    29;    letter 

from,  ii.  2. 

Rev.    D.      M.,      "  Lutheran 

Church  in  Virginia,"  i.  153; 
270. 


I 


INDEX. 


419 


"  Going  to  do,  stop  going  and  do," 

ii-  54- 

Golden;  Hon.  E.  S.,  ii.  177. 

Government ;  Civil  and  Ecclesias- 
tical, reply  to  Dr.  Walther,  ii. 
171-172. 

Gown ;  preaching  in  the,  C.  P.  K. 
in  St.  John's,  i.  152;  in  the 
West  Indies,  i.  235;  258;  Dr. 
Kurtz  in  the  gown,  ii.   16. 

wearing  of   the,  controversy 

in  St.  Mark's,  ii.  3;  15;  a 
church  question,  not  congre- 
gational, ii.  4;  exclusively 
Protestant  usage,  ii.  9 ;  sup- 
ported by  Ministeriuni ;  Dr. 
Kurtz's  sermon  against,  ii.  13; 
arguments  against,  (S.  S.  S.), 
ii.  14;  desirable,  not  essential 
to  true  Lutheranism,  ii.  20. 

Graff;  Mr.,  of  Pittsburgh,  i.  273. 

Grahn;  Rev.  H.,  German  prayer 
at  funeral  of  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  399. 

"  Great  books  are   reservoirs 

good  periodicals  are  flowing 
springs,"  ii.   294. 

Green;  Dr.  W.  Henry,  of  Prince- 
ton, C.  P.  K.'s  friendship  with, 
ii.  319;  320;  urges  C.  P.  K.  to 
prepare  paper  for  Am.  Orien- 
tal Society ;  introduces  him 
to  Mr.  Lenox ;  acknowledges 
help  in  Lange's  Commentary 
(Song  of  Solomon)   ii.  320. 

Greenwald ;  Rev.  E.,  proposes 
division  of  Synodical  terri- 
tory, ii.  27. 

Gregory;  Dr.  Caspar  Rene,  C.  P. 
K.'s  library,  ii.  298;  reviews 
Conservative  Reformation 

(Bibl.  Sacra)  ii.  304. 

G.  S. — General  Synod. 

Guericke,  Allgem.  Christl.  Sym- 
bolik  ;  translation  from,  i.  257. 

Haas;  Rev.  G.  C.  F.,  President 
of  N.  Y.  Synod;  C.  P.  K.  as 
teacher  of  Philosophy,  ii.  267. 

"  Halle'sche  Nachrichten ;"  pro- 
posed translation ;  recom- 
mended by  G.  S.,  i.  331. 


Harkey;  Rev.  S.  L.,  resents  the 
influence  of  foreign  dictators 
{see  Ruperti),  ii.  213  214;  de- 
fends the  rights  of  the  "  Com- 
munion of  Saints,"  ii.  214. 

Rev.  S.  W.,  signs  license  of 

C.  P.  K.,  i.  43 ;  favors  "  New 
Measures,"  i.  in. 

Harms ;  Claus,  his  prophecy  ful- 
filled, i.  Z22. 

Harn's  Feet-washing ;  reviewed 
by  C.  P.  K.,  i.  310. 

Hasselquist ;  Rev.  T.  N.,  repre- 
sents Swedes  by  letter,  to 
Reading  Convention,  ii.    174. 

Haupt;  Prof.  Herman,  Penna. 
College,  i.  29. 

Hay ;  Rev.  Chas.  A.,  translates, 
with  Dr.  Jacobs,  Schmid's 
Dogmatik,  i.  23,  note;  sketch 
of  C.  P.  K.  in  college,  i.  30; 
visited  by  C.  P.  K.,  i.  273; 
signs  Pacific  Overture,  i.  362; 
denounces  "  Ministerial  Ses- 
sions," ii.  26,  27. 

Hazelius ;  Dr.  Ernest  L.,  German 
teacher  of  C.  P.  K.,  i.  28;  2,7; 
predecessor  of  C.  Ph.  K.  in 
Seminary,  i.  11. 

Hebrew ;  and  Classics ;  C.  P.  K.'s 
earliest  love  in  languages,  i.  71. 

Hebron  Luth.  church ;  litigation 
in,  ii.   177. 

Heinitsch ;  C.,  ii.   157. 

Heiskell ;  Catherine  Susan  (moth- 
er), i.   26. 

family,  i.  27. 

Peter  (grandfather),  indul- 
gent to  little  Charles,  i.  27; 
letter  from,  i.  34. 

Helfersley;  Mrs.  Sarah,  catechu- 
men of  C.  Ph.  K.,  i.  26. 

Hengstenberg;  Christology  of,  i. 
127. 

Henkel;  Rev.  S.  G.,  with  D.  M. 
Henkel  publishes  transl.  of 
Symb.  Rooks ;  C.  P.  K.'s  as- 
sistance invited,  i.  174;  import- 
ant contribution  to  Luth.  liter- 
ature, i.  T94;  C.  Ph.  K.  takes 
Augsb.  Conf.  i.  206. 


420 


INDEX. 


He  that  is  not  against  us;  from 
edit.  L.  &  M.,  ii.  8i. 

Hill;  Rev.  Reuben,  opposes  the 
Galesb.  Rule,  ii.  212;  corn 
with  C.  P.  K.  about  founding 
Luth.  Review,  ii.  322-323. 

Hodge ;  Dr.  A.  A.,  letter  to  C.  P. 
K.,  ii.  318. 

Dr.  Charles,  see  also  Infant 

Baptism;  C.  P.  K.'s  personal 
relations  with,  ii.  319;  321; 
his  tribute  to,  ii.  319. 

Hofman;  Rev.  J.  N.,  transl. 
Arndt's   True   Christianity,   i. 

331. 
Holston     Synod     adopts     Galesb. 

Rule,  ii.  221. 
Home  Missions ;  importance  of,  to 

Luth.  Church,  i.  260. 
Houpt;  L.  L.,  ii.  157. 
Howard;  Rev.  Dr.,  of  Pittsburgh, 

i.,  288. 
Howson ;   Dean,  cordial  reception 

to  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  369;  371. 
How   to  Make  a   Paper   Succeed, 

edit.  L.  &  M.  ii.  54. 
Hubley;  George,  of  Pittsburgh,  i. 

271. 
Humor  and  Good  Humor,  ii.  338. 
Hutter ;  Rev.  E.  W.,  mentioned,  i. 

361 ;  installation  of  C.  P.  K.  in 

St.    Mark's,   ii.    i ;    Eulogy  of 

Dr.  Kurtz  reviewed  by  C.  P. 

K,  ii.  82. 

Idealism  and  Realism,  ii.  275-277. 

Strength  and  Weakness  of,  ii. 

272,  ff. 

"  Ignorance  is  neither  innocence 
nor  virtue,"  ii.  259;  ("nor 
safety  ")   ii.  280. 

Inauguration  of  Zachary  Taylor, 
i.  212. 

Indiana  Synod  opposed  to  Galesb. 
Rule,  ii.  221. 

Indicator;  the,  C.  P.  K.'s  interest 
in,  ii.  145 ;  his  method  of 
teaching  described,  (Dr. 
Schmauk),  ii.  145,  146. 

Infant  Baptism  and  Infant  Salva- 
tion in  the  Calvinistic  System ; 


statements  in  Cons.  Reforma- 
tion questioned  by  Dr.  Hodge, 
ii.  314;  C.  P.  K.'s  reply, 
(Mercersburg  Rev.)  ;  after- 
wards in  book  form,  (1874), 
ii.  315 ;  Dr.  Hodge's  letter,  ii. 
317;  "David  and  Goliath,"  ii. 
317,  note. 

Insulanus ;  Dr.  G.  F.  Krotel,  ii. 
206. 

Intelligencer ;  Ev.  Luth.,  edited 
(1826-7)  by  Dr.  D.  F.  Schaef- 
fer  and  C.  Ph.  K.,  i.  8. 

Iowa ;  Synod  of,  represented  at 
Reading  Convention,  ii.  174; 
raises  question  in  G.  C.  on 
Church  Fellowship,  ii.  195 ;  its 
own  position,  ii.  195 ;  198 ;  de- 
clared by  C.  P.  K.  (1870)  the 
only  consistent  one,  ii.  204. 
See  General  Council. 

"  Irishman ;  the  Greek,"  i.  38. 

Jackson  ;   Professor,  ii.  399. 

Jacobs ;  Rev.  Henry  Eyster,  transl. 
of  Schmid's  Dogmatik,  i.  23, 
note;  The  Sabbath  Question, 
(Ev.  Reviezv),  ii.  123;  letter 
to  C.  P.  K.  concerning  this 
article,  ii.  124;  Hebron  case, 
ii.  177;  letters  to  C.  P.  K., 
Galesb.  Rule,  ii.  225  ;  228 ;  230 ; 
theory  of  unionism  annihilat- 
ed, ii.  226;  reply  of  C.  P.  K., 
ii.  227 ;  Lutheran  ministers  in 
non-Lutheran  pulpits,  ii.  229; 
altar  fellowship,  ii.  231 ;  de- 
fends Galesb.  Rule,  ii.  237;  lit- 
erary work  proposed  to  C.  P. 
K.,  ii.  321 ;  letter  to,  from 
Coburg,  ii.  375. 

Rev.  Michael,  teacher  in  Get- 

tysb.  Gymnasium,  i.  28;  37; 
Professor  in  Penna.  College, 
i-  29 ;  53 ;  and  the  Pacific 
Overture,  i.  362. 

Jacobus;  Rev.  Dr.,  of  Pittsburgh, 
i.  288. 

J.  A.  S. — Rev.  Joseph  A.  Seiss. 

Jefferson ;  "  Father  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Virginia,"  ii.  61. 


INDEX. 


421 


Jubilee  Service,  ii.  181 -182. 
Jubilees;      Reformation,      1817,  i. 
321,  322;  1867,  ii.  183. 


Kaufmann;      Rev.      A.,      transl. 

Tholuck's  John,  i.  304. 
Keck ;  Heinrich,  i.  2. 
Keller;   Rev.   Benjamin,  C.   P.  K. 

confirmed  by,  i.  34. 
Rev.  Ezra,  teacher  in  Gettysb. 

Gymnasium,   i.   28. 
Kendall ;   Professor,  ii.  399. 
Kinsolving;    Mrs.    Julia     (sister) 

letter  to,  quoted,  i.  141 ;  letters 

from,  quoted,  i.  305;  306;  her 

character,    i.    305 ;    307 ;    her 

death,  i.  306;  her  sons,  i.  307. 
Rev.   G.    Herbert,    (nephew) 

Bishop  of  Texas,  i.  307. 
Rev.  O.  A.,  (brother-in-law), 

i.   26 ;    letter   from,   quoted,   i. 

306. 
Kirchliche     Zeitschrift;     In     Me- 

moriam         (Dr.        Fritschel) 

quoted,  i.  72. 
Knauff;  Henry,  ii.  34;  with  H.  W. 

Knauff,  publisher  of  Lutheran 

and  Home  Journal,  ii.  28. 
Knox ;  Rev.  John  P.,  pastor  in  St. 

Thomas,  i.  216;  221. 
Kohler ;  Rev.  J.,  ii.  139. 
Krauth ;  Charles  Philip,   (father). 

Chronology: 

1797-1818.     Birth   May  7th, 

and  baptism,  i.  2 ;  early  years, 

i.    6;    studies    medicine,    i.    7; 

theological  training,  by  Dr.  D. 

F.  SchaeflFer,  i.  7. 

1818.  Assistant  to  Rev. 
Abr.  Reck,  Winchester,  Va.,  i. 
8. 

1819.  licensed  by  Penna. 
Min.,  i.  8;  pastor  in  Martins- 
burg  and  Shepherdstown,  i.  8 ; 
138. 

1820.  Marriage,  i.  26. 
1824.  Death  of  wife,  i.  26. 
1826.    Editor   of   Ev.    Luth. 

Intelligencer,  i.  8;  Director  of 
Gettysb.   Seminary ;   President 


of    Synod   of    Md.    and   Va. ; 
called  to  St.  Matthew's,  i.  9. 

1827.  Moves  to  Philadelphia, 
i.  9;  friendship  with  Dr. 
Demme,  i.  10. 

1833.  Professor  of  Biblical 
and  Oriental  Literature  in 
Gettysb.  Sem.,  i.  11. 

1834.  President  of  Penna. 
College,  i.  11;  second  mar- 
riage, i.  28. 

1849.  First  contr.  to  Ev. 
Review,  quoted,  i.  20. 

1850.  Synodical  sermon  in 
Charleston,  i.  151 ;  quoted,  i. 
365  ;  403 ;  resigns  Presidency 
of  College,  i.  12;  200. 

1850-1861.  Editor  of  Ev. 
Review,  i.  12. 

1867.  Death,  May  30th,  i. 
24 ;  tablet,  i.  25 ;  Conservative 
Reformation  dedicated  to  his 
memory,  (1871),  ii.  301;  i.  6. 

Personal  traits:  accuracy 
and  thoroughness,  i.  6;  13; 
love  of  reading,  i.  6;  14;  re- 
tentive memory,  i.  13;  linguis- 
tic attainments,  i.  11;  13;  14; 
character  and  bearing  i.  11; 
attractive  personality,  i.  16, 
17;  benevolent  and  unsel- 
fish, i.  16;  despised  duplicity 
and  meanness,  i.  17;  re- 
markably reticent,  i.  12; 
modest  and  unassuming,  i.  14, 
15;  of  "crystalline  sincerity," 
i.  17:  head  of  his  family,  i.  S; 
in  conversation,  i.  17;  in  the 
pulpit,  i.  15 ;  deep  religious 
convictions,  i.  18;  in  bereave- 
ment, i.  139;  306;  irenical  dis- 
position, i.  8;  15;  18;  363; 
368;  wrote  too  little,  i.  15; 
203;  308. 

Theological  position:  stated 
by  himself,  i.  8 ;  18;  influence 
of  Dr.  Demme,  i.  10;  firm  in 
his  convictions,  but  averse  to 
strife,  i.  15;  18;  described  by 
C.  P.  K.,  i.  19;  ii.  81;  by  S.  S. 
S.,  i.  374;  the  Augsb.  Corrfes- 


422 


INDEX. 


Krauth;  Charles  Ph.;  Continued: 
sion,  i.  19;  Schmid's  Dog- 
matik,  i.  20 ;  199 ;  Symbolical 
Books,  i.  21,  ff. ;  Definite  Plat- 
form, i.  372 ;  Pacific  Overture, 
i.  362;  C.  Ph.  K.  claimed  by 
both  sides,  i.  19;  20;  364;  the 
real  weight  of  his  influence  on 
the  conservative  side.  i.  20 ; 
365 ;  decidedly  antagonistic  to 
Amer.  Lutheranism,  i.  364 ;  cf . 
ii.  132,  note ;  not  afraid  of  the 
truth,  i.  108. 

ICrauth  ;  Charles  Porterfield, 
Chronology: 

1823-1830.  Birth,  March 
17th;  baptism;  his  middle 
name ;  mother's  death,  i.  26 ; 
childhood  in  Staunton,  Va., 
and  Philadelphia ;  his  first 
school ;  his  "  little  hatchet ;" 
reminiscences  of  St.  Mat- 
thew's, i.  27. 

1831.  Enters  Gettysburg 
Gymnasium;  his  teachers,  i. 
28. 

1834-1839.  His  father's  se- 
cond marriage,  i.  28,  29;  Penn- 
sylvania College,  i.  29;  his 
teachers,  i.  29 ;  41  ;  42 ;  Philo- 
mathean  Society,  i.  29;  his  col- 
lege years,  (Hay),  i.  30;  (Bit- 
tinger)  i.  31;  Article:  College 
Days,  i.  36;  the  college  poet,  i. 
31 ;  41 ;  early  poems,  i.  32 ;  42 ; 
begins  a  "  regularly  irregular 
journal,"  i.  2^ ;  "  hates  Ger- 
man," i.  :iz\  confirmed  (1837) 
by  Rev.  B.  Keller :  enters 
Theol.  Sem.,  (1839);  his 
teachers,  i.  34. 

1841.  Graduates  from  Sem., 
i.  34;  licensed  at  Hagerstown, 
i.  43  ;  47 ;  52 ;  pastor  in  Canton, 
i.  43 ;  46 ;  private  studies,  i. 
44;  51;  69;  70;  first  sermon, 
i.  46 ;  first  baptism,  i.  47 ;  de- 
velops a  love  of  close,  pro- 
tracted study,  i.  52 ;  gives  les- 
sons in  German,  i.  53 ;  threat- 


ened    with     nervous     break- 
down, i.  52,  53. 

1842.  Leaves  Canton,  i.  44; 
60 ;  ordained  in  Frederick, 
Md.,  i.  no;  called  to  Lombard 
St.  church  for  six  months ;  a 
brilliant  preacher,  i.  61. 

1843.  Re-elected  in  Lombard 
Str.  church,  i.  61 ;  holds  pro- 
tracted meetings,  i.  64;  91 ;  in- 
terested in  S.  S.  work,  i.  67 ; 
address  quoted,  i.  68. 

1844.  Appointed  by  Synod 
of  Md.  to  prepare  sermon  on 
Luth.  view  of  Lord's  Supper, 
i.  114;  reviews  Prof.  Stuart's 
article  on  Real  Presence,  i. 
117;  careful  preparation  for 
this  work,  i.  119;  marriage,  i. 

77- 

1845.  Resigns  in  Lombard 
Str. ;  farewell  sermon  printed  ; 
re-elected,  i.  78 ;  excused  from 
delivering  sermon  before 
Synod,  i.  135. 

1846.  Supplies  Dr.  Morris's 
pulpit,  i.  74 ;  109 ;  writes  edi- 
torials of  Luth.  Observer,  i. 
74 ;  ii.  28 ;  drafts  a  Liturgy,  i. 
67. 

1847.  Controversy  with  Dr. 
Kurtz  on  Private  Communion, 
i.  75 ;  much  discouraged  in 
Balto. ;  final  resignation,  i.  78  ; 
79;  pastor  in  Shepherdstown, 
i.  80;  and  Martinsburg,  i.  138. 

1848.  Death  of  little  Susan, 
i.  138,  140;  182;  pastor  in 
Winchester,  i.  141  ;  suggested 
for  second  professorship  in 
Gettysb.  Sem.,  i.  149 ;  delegate 
to  Gen.  Synod,  i.  151  ;  contri- 
butes to  Mercersburg  Rev.,  i. 
199;  friendship  with  B.  M. 
Schmucker.  i.  142  ;  160  ;  187 ; 
correspondence  with  him, 
(1848-52),  i.  142,  143;  182- 
192 ;  change  in  theological 
views  substantially  complete,  i. 
160 ;  166 ;  preaching  in  Wash- 
ington, i.   151. 


INDEX. 


423 


Krautli ;  Charles  P. ;  Continued: 

1849.  Calls  from  various 
congregations,  (1849-1854),  i. 
150;  received  into  Synod  of 
Va.,  i.  154;  Secretary  of  its 
Home  Miss.  Soc,  i.  186; 
birth  of  son,  i.  199;  Chrysos- 
tom,  the  "  banner  article  "  of 
Ev.  Rcvieiv,  i.  158;  his  interest 
in  Rcvicxv,  i.  175;  180;  189; 
literary  work,  i.  183,  184. 

1850.  Delegate  to  Gen. 
Synod  at  Charleston,  S.  C,  i. 

151.  154- 

1851.  Introduces  Liturgy  of 
Gen.  Synod,  i.  191  ;  call  to 
New  York  declined,  i.  150; 
preaches  in  St.  John's  and  St. 
Mark's,  Phila.,  i.  152;  sermon 
on  Popular  Amusements,  i. 
145  ;  warm  friendship  with  J. 
A.  S.,  i.  149;  Trustee  of 
Gettvsb  Sem.,  i.  194. 

1852.  Wife's  health  failing, 
i.  152;  214;  visit  to  West 
Indies ;  arrival  in  St.  Thomas, 
i.  216;  call  to  Dutch  Ref. 
congr.,  i.  216;  221  ;  in  the  par- 
sonage, i.  221;  248;  preaching 
"  as  a  Lutheran,"  i.  222,  (cf. 
ii.  200:  2);  most  remarkable 
event  of  his  life,  i.  242;  ex- 
perience with  yellow  fever,  i. 
217;  232,  22,3;  251,  252;  254; 
ii.  235 ;  interest  in  early  mis- 
sionary work  in  tropics,  i.  217- 
218;  literary  work,  i.  257;  261  ; 
invited  to  take  part  in  Hen- 
kel's  transl.  of  Symb.  Books, 
i.   174. 

1853.  Four  months  in  Santa 
Cruz,  i.  218:  return  to  Amer- 
ica, i.  220;  261 ;  death  of  wife; 
A  Tribute,  i.  262 ;  Dr.  Rey- 
nolds' plans  for  C.  P.  K.,  i. 
180. 

1854.  Elected  President  of 
Va.  Synod,  i.  156;  sermon: 
Burning  of  the  Old  Church, 
quoted,  i.  265-270. 

1855.  Revival  in  Winches- 


ter, i.  310;  first  call  to  Pitts- 
burgh declined,  i.  271;  310; 
visits  Pittsb.,  i.  273 ;  second 
call,  i.  274;  protest  in  Win- 
chester; call  declined,  i.  275, 
276 ;  second  marriage,  i.  270 ; 
bridal  trip  to  Pittsb. ;  C.  Ph. 
K.  asked  to  intercede ;  third 
call  accepted,  i.  282;  letter  of 
acceptance,  i.  286;  leaves  Win- 
chester ;  resignation  quoted, 
i.  287. 

1856.  Success  of  C.  P.  K.'s 
pastorate  in  Pittsb.,  i.  291 ; 
292 ;  made  Doctor  of  Divinity, 
i.  288;  frames  action  of  Pittsb. 
Synod  on  Def.  Platform,  i. 
377;  ii.  115;  "preparing  for 
the  battle,"  (against  S.  S.  S.), 

i-  375- 

1857.  Hopeful  attitude  of 
C.  P.  K..  i.  380;  cf.  ii.  115; 
series  of  Articles  on  Gen. 
Synod,  i.  381,  ff. ;  kindly  feel- 
ing of  S.  S.  S.,  i.  410. 

1858.  Death  of  Mrs.  Kin- 
solving,  i.  305 ;  C.  P.  K.  ap- 
proached by  St.  John's, 
Philada. ;  Pittsb.  friends  pro- 
test, i.  290,  291 ;  defends  S.  S. 
S.  against  charge  of  unsound 
doctrine,  i.  411  ;  Three  Essays 
on  Poverty,  quoted,  i.  218-219. 

1859.  Opposes  admission  of 
Melanchthon  Synod  to  Gen. 
Synod;  offers  motion  qualify- 
ing its  admission,  i.  412;  pub- 
lishes transl.  of  Tholuck's 
John,  i.  303 ;  unanimous  call 
to  St.  Mark's.  Philada.,  i.  291, 
295 ;  resolutions  of  Pittsb. 
Council,  i.  295 ;  resigns  in 
Pittsb.,  i.  297 ;  pastor  in  St. 
Mark's,  ii.  i,  ff. ;  the  gown 
conflict,  ii.  3,  ff. 

1860.  Edits  Fleming's  Voca- 
bulary of  Philosophy,  ii.  268; 
Two  Sermons  on  Christian 
Liberty,  ii.  5 ;  A  Melanch- 
thonian  Pronunciamento,  quot- 
ed,  ii.    15;   received   into   East 


424 


INDEX. 


Krauth  ;  Charles  P. ;  Continued: 
Penna.    Synod,    ii.    25 ;    edits 
Lutheran  and  Home  Journal, 
ii.  29. 

1861.  Autocracy  of  Tailor 
vs.  Liberty  of  Church,  quoted, 
ii.  18,  19;  resigns  St.  Mark's, 
ii.  23,  24;  Editor-in-Chief  of 
Lutheran  and  Missionary, 
(1861-1867),  ii.  28;  34;  57; 
58;  requested  by  Publ.  Board 
to  write  a  Life  of  Luther  for 
children,  ii.  361. 

1862.  Member  of  Am. 
Oriental  Society,  ii.  320;  Arti- 
cles on  Bible  Revision  and 
History  of  Authorized  Ver- 
sion, (L.  &  M.)  ii.  331. 

1864.  Supplies  St.  John's, 
ii.  180;  Philada.  Seminary  es- 
tablished, ii.  127;  139,  ff. ;  C. 
P.  K.  first  English  (Norton) 
Professor,  ii.  141  ;  replies  to 
charge  at  installation  of  Fa- 
culty, ii.  143 ;  branches  assign- 
ed to  him,  ii.  144. 

1865.  Received  into  Min.  of 
Penna.,  ii.  27;  appointed  on 
Ch.  B.  Comm.,  ii.  190;  The 
Two  Pageants,  (tribute  to 
Lincoln),  ii.  j^;  a  mistake  mis- 
taken, ii.  y^ ;  declaration  of 
his  position  on  Fundamentals, 
ii.  114;  and  retraction  of  all 
utterances  contrary  to  it,  ii. 
115;  controversy  with  Dr. 
Brown  over  doctrinal  basis  of 
two  Seminaries,  ii.  146;  death 
of  two  children,  ii.   178. 

1866.  Trustee  of  University 
of  Penna.,  ii.  252;  Tribute  to 
Dr.  Kurtz,  ii.  82 ;  delegate 
from  Penna.  Synod  to  Gen. 
Synod  at  Fort  Wayne,  ii.  157; 
questions  Dr.  Sprecher's  right 
to  refuse  credentials  of  dele- 
gation, ii.  160;  (cf.  General 
Synod;)  doctrinal  position  of 
Penna.  Synod  revised,  as  pro- 
posed by  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  161 ;  he 
writes     the     "  Fraternal     Ad- 


dress," ii.  164 ;  address  before 
Pittsb.  Synod,  ii.  162;  169; 
prepares  way  for  proposed 
general  body  in  articles  on 
Church  Polity,  ii  170;  pastor 
in  St.  Stephen's,  ii.  181 ;  the 
Reading  Convention,  ii.  173; 
Theses  on  Fundamental  Prin- 
ciples of  Faith ;  and  of  Church 
Polity;  basis  of  General  Coun- 
cil's Constitution,  ii.  174;  Ar- 
ticles on  Liturgies,  (1866- 
1867),   ii.    190. 

1867.  Death  of  C.  Ph.  K, 
i.  24;  ii.  178;  Jubilee  Service, 
ii.  181 ;  two  Christmas  Hymns, 
written  for  St.  Stephen's  S.  S., 
ii.  182;  General  Council  or- 
ganized, ii.  127;  183;  abstract 
of  opening  sermon,  ii.  183-189; 
Church  Fellowship  question, 
ii.  196;  C.  P.  K.'s  position 
the  gradual  outgrowth  of  his 
confessional  principles,  ii. 
197. 

1868.  C.  P.  K.  witness  in 
litigation  over  church  pro- 
perty, ii.  176;  177;  lecture  in 
Kittaning  (Life  Questions), 
ii.  177;  reply  to  Encyclica  of 
Pius  IX.,  ii.  189 ;  Church  Fel- 
lowship ;  Pittsburgh  declara- 
tion, ii.  198;  C.  P.  K.'s  posi- 
tion, ii.  199;  Professor  of 
Moral  and  Intellectual  Philo- 
sophy in  Univ.  of  Penna. ;  re- 
signs as  Trustee ;  friendship 
with  Dr.  Stille,  ii.  252 ;  tribute 
of  latter  to  C.  P.  K.'s  scholar- 
ship and  character  (1883),  ii. 
252. 

1869.  Translation  of  Augsb. 
Conf.,  ii.  118;  C.  P.  K.  begins 
work  on  Special  Collects  for 
Ch.  B.,  ii.  191 ;  the  "  Minne- 
sota Question,"  ii.  202. 

1870.  Theses  on  Justifica- 
tion, ii.  189 ;  Committee's  re- 
port on  Minnesota  Question; 
not  C.  P.  K.'s  view ;  not  satis- 
factory to  G.  C,  ii.  203. 


INDEX. 


425 


Krauth ;  Charles  P.;  Continued: 

1871.  C  P.  K.  convinced 
that  Iowa  position  is  the  only 
consistent  one,  ii.  204;  cf.  ii. 
202;  "Conservative  Reforma- 
tion," ii.  299 ;  C.  P.  K.  mem- 
ber of  Old  Testament  Revi- 
sion Company ;  "  the  most 
scholarly  representative  of  the 
Luth.  Church,"  ii.  331. 

1872.  C.  P.  K.'s  declaration 
on  Church  Fellowship  accept- 
ed as  G.  C.'s  official  statement 
(Akron),   ii.  204. 

1873.  Vice-Provost  of  Uni- 
versity of  Penna.,  ii.  252 ; 
"  Strength  and  Weakness  of 
Idealism,"  Evan.  Alliance,  New 
York,  ii.  322 ;  see  ii.  272,  ff. 

1874.  Berkeley's  Principles 
of  Human  Knowledge,  ii.  270, 
271  ;  Thetical  Statement  of 
Doctrine  concerning  Ministry 
of  the  Gospel.  (1874-1875)  ii. 
194. 

1875.  Prepares  draft  for 
constitution  of  congregations, 
ii.  192 ;  invited  to  furnish 
paper  for  work  on  Amer. 
Libraries  (Bur.  of  Education, 
Washington),  ii.  283;  Gales- 
burg  Rule.  ii.  205,  206;  first 
Article  on  Purity  of  Pulpit, 
Sanctity  of  Altar;  quoted,  ii. 
209 ;  C.  P.  K.'s  statement  ap- 
proved by  chairmen  of  all 
Synodical  delegations  at  Gales- 
burg,  ii.  211. 

1876.  C.  P.  K.'s  position  at- 
tacked by  correspondents  and 
editor  of  L.  &r  M.,  ii.  214; 
his  defense  of  his  opponents 
against  Dr.  Ruperti ;  "  carnal 
weapons"  condemned,  ii.  218; 
14  articles  continued,  on  Pul- 
pit and  Altar,  ii.  219;  "an 
indirect  auto-biography,"  ii. 
236;  C.  P.  K.  ordered  to  pre- 
pare Theses  on  Galesburg 
Rule,   ii.   222 ;   correspondence 


concerning    Rule,    ii.   224-243 ; 
carefully  preserved,  ii.  223. 

1877.  105  Theses  on  Pulpit 
and  Altar  Fellowship,  ii.  189; 
222 ;  C.  P.  K.  representing 
mind  of  G.  C,  ii.  223 ;  Ser- 
mon :  "  Religion  and  Religion- 
isms;" debate  on  Theses;  C. 
P.  K.'s  position  unassailable, 
ii.  244;  First  Free  Diet,  ii. 
324 ;  Paper :  "  Relations  of  the 
Luth.  Church  to  the  Denomi- 
nations around  us  ;"  clash  with 
Dr.  Brown,  ii.  325. 

1878.  Theses  on  the  Sab- 
bath, ii.  124;  Fleming's  Voca- 
bulary, new  edition,  ii.  268; 
offered  editorship  of  proposed 
Reviezv,  by  Dr.  Hill,  ii.  322. 

1879.  Designs  seal  of  G.  C. ; 
attends  the  Council  for  the 
last  time,  ii.  246 ;  requested 
by  Pittsb.  Synod  to  prepare 
Life  of  Luther,  ii.  361. 

1880.  Resolution  of  Penna. 
Synod  asking  C.  P.  K.  to  pre- 
pare Luther  Biography,  ii. 
362 ;  European  trip  arranged, 
ii-  363-364 ;  see  Europe ;  fail- 
ing health,  ii.  2>77 ',  C.  P.  K. 
acting  Provost  of  Univ. ; 
Trustees  petitioned  by  Faculty 
to  elect  him  Provost ;  letter  to 
Mr.  Fraley  concerning  re-or- 
ganization of  University,  ii. 
255,  256;  C.  P.  K.'s  burden 
under  new  plan,  ii.  257. 

1881.  Address  at  inaugur- 
ation of  Provost  Pepper,  ii. 
257-258;  lecture  on  Luther 
and  Luther's  Germany,  ii.  377 ; 
summer  trip,  ii.  383 ;  Cosmos, 
ii.  385 ;  letter  to  A.  S..  work 
of  G.  C.  ii.  223 ;  first  grand- 
child, ii.  383. 

1882.  Editor-in-chief  of 
Lutheran  Church  Review,  ii. 
324;  summer  at  Mt.  Desert,  ii. 
383,  384 ;  "  better  but  not 
well,"  ii.  395 ;  Microcosmos, 
ii.  392 ;  his  Nunc  Dimittis,  ii. 


426 


INDEX. 


Krauth ;  Charles  P.;  Continued: 
384 ;  urged  to  write  on  Pre- 
destination, ii.  326-327;  last 
visit  to  Seminary,  ii.  394 ; 
Dean  of  Faculty  of  Philoso- 
phy, Univ.  of  Penna.,  Dec. 
8th,  ii.  252 ;  alarm  in  Univer- 
sity over  his  condition,  ii.  395. 

1883.  His  death,  Jan.  2d, 
ii.  397 ;  his  funeral,  Jan.  5th, 
ii.  398 ;  his  grave ;  summing 
up  his  character  and  work,  ii. 
399- 

Personal  traits:  faithful  as 
a  pastor,  i.  143,  144;  183;  in- 
terest in  Home  Missions,  i. 
260 ;  in  Charity,  i.  302 ;  a  true 
Christian  patriot,  ii.  59;  hatred 
of  slavery,  i.  290 ;  dignity  in 
his  presence,  ii.  265 ;  influence 
of  his  personality,  ii.  260;  269; 
polished  courtesy,  ii.  265 ;  love 
for  children,  i.  313;  ii.  383; 
with  his  own  children,  i.  313- 
315;  modest  estimate  of  him- 
self, i.  183;  humility,  willing- 
ness to  learn,  i.  74;  ii.  228; 
235;  optimistic,  i.  299;  376; 
381;  ii.  50;  278;  love  of  close, 
protracted  study,  i.  52 ;  92 ; 
119;  143;  178;  312-313;  mak- 
ing the  most  of  his  time,  i.  35 ; 
51;  59;  86;  202;  207;  215; 
259;  ii.  147;  accurate  memory, 
ii.  261 ;  keen  sense  of  the  ludi- 
crous, i.  31;  ii.  78;  "mind 
worked  with  amazing  celer- 
ity," i.  31  ;  wonderful  gift  of 
language,  ii.  145  ;  master  of  a 
precise,  beautiful  style,  i.  173; 
love  of  nature  and  natural 
science,  i.  215;  ii.  383;  384; 
385,  ff. ;  fondness  for  Shak- 
spere,  i.  31 ;  ii.  Z2>7 !  enthusi- 
astic student  of  Liturgies,  i. 
155;  ii.  190;  just  and  kind  as 
a  reviewer,  i.  117;  ii.  2>2i7, 
338 ;  "  a  little  severe,"  ii.  358 ; 
hearty  encouragement  to 
younger  scholars,  ii.  267; 
" ideal   teacher   for   ideal   stu- 


dents," ii.  14s ;  honest  and 
truthful  as  a  teacher,  ii.  260; 
262 ;  patient,  kindly,  courteous 
in  class-room,  ii.  259 ;  264 ; 
269;  discipline  gentle  but  ef- 
fective, ii.  265 ;  his  wit  a 
stimulant  to  students,  ii.  263 ; 
apt  illustrations  used,  ii.  262 ; 
his  fearless  love  of  truth,  i. 
147;  ii.  278;  hard  to  convince, 
but  convinced  very  thorough- 
ly, ii.  236;  a  lover  of  peace,  i. 
50;  172;  ii.  248;  his  joy  in 
believing,  i.  156;  conscious- 
ness of  his  special  mission,  i. 
172;  193,  194;  willing  to  en- 
dure hardness,  ii.  147 ;  invinci- 
ble power  of  his  logic,  ii.  145 ; 
244 ;  combative,  not  destruct- 
ive, ii.  78 ;  fighting  principles,., 
not  men,  ii.  82;  218;  240;  400; 
kind  and  considerate  to  an- 
tagonists, ii.  78;  244;  247; 
loyalty  to  old  friends  who  dif- 
fered from  him,  ii.  218. 
Krauth  Correspondence.  Letters 
from  C.  Ph.  K.  to  C.  P.  K.: 
preparing  sermons  ;  "  cultivate 
the  German,"  i.  51 ;  comment- 
aries unsatisfactory,  i.  58  r 
writing  sermons,  i.  87 ;  to 
Baltimore,  i.  88;  91;  93;  105  r 
106;  read  less,  study  more,  i. 
90 ;  anxiety  about  son's  health, 
i.  91,  93;  showy  preaching,  i. 
94;  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  i. 
97;  Dr.  Arnold's  Life,  i.  106; 
the  Lord's  Supper,  i.  107;  the 
Real  Presence,  i.  T08 ;  to  Shep- 
herdstown,  i.  197;  death  of 
little  Susan,  i.  139;  birth  of 
grandson,  i.  199;  Penna. 
Synod,  i.  201  ;  reviewing  the 
Review,  i.  204 ;  wanted,  a 
champion,  i.  205  ;  Review  un- 
der a  cloud ;  Symbolism  and 
vital  godliness,  i.  208 ;  call  to 
Pittsb. ;  sympathy  for  Win- 
chester, i.  2S:y ;  aversion  to 
Definite  Platform,  i.  ^72 ;  con- 
curs   in    views    of    C.    P.    K.. 


INDEX. 


427 


Krautli  Correspondence;  Con- 
tinued: 
(Gen.  Synod  and  Def.  Platf.), 
i.  380;  death  of  Mrs.  Kin- 
solving,  i.  306;  Dr.  S.  S.  S. 
pleased  with  C.  P.  K.,  i.  410. 

Letters  from  C.  P.  K.  to  C. 
Ph.  K.:  Canton,  i.  49,  ff. ; 
first  meeting  of  Synod,  i.  52; 
studies  in  German  and  He- 
brew, i.  55  ;  the  folly  of  verse 
writing ;  English  reading,  i. 
56 ;  from  Baltimore,  i.  86 ;  91 ; 
93;  94;  96;  100;  more  books, 
i,  89;  abstract  preaching,  i.  92; 
preparation  for  preaching,  i. 
95;  Bible  study,  i.  97;  the 
Trinity,  i.  98,  99:  C.  P.  K.'s 
library,  i.  99;  Philippians  2:  6, 
i.  102;  Exegesis  and  German, 
i.  102,  ff. ;  pastoral  work,  i. 
105;  the  Lord's  Supper,  i.  107; 
Dr.  Morris,  i.  108;  discourse 
on  Lord's  Supper,  i.  135; 
death  of  little  Susan,  i.  138; 
call  to  Winchester,  i.  141  ;  new 
hymn  book,  i.  198;  from  Win- 
chester, i.  198;  200;  310;  311; 
Article  on  Transfiguration,  i. 
202,  203 ;  importance  of  Re- 
view ;  Reformation  library 
desired,  i.  207;  from  St. 
Thomas,  i.  252 ;  from  Santa 
Cruz,  i.  257;  return  from  W. 
L,  i.  220;  death  of  Mrs. 
Krauth,  i.  262 ;  leaving  Win- 
chester, i.  287;  first  impres- 
sions of  Pittsburgh,  i.  289;  St. 
Marks,  i.  292,  296 ;  Ev.  Re- 
viezv,  i.  307-309 ;  from  Pittsb., 
i.  311,  312.  313;  Calovius,  i. 
375  ;  not  inclined  for  Platform 
war,  i.  376. 
Krauth  family  ;  ancestors  ;  emigra- 
tion to  America,  i.  i. 

Catherine     Susan     Heiskell 

(mother)   i.  26. 

Charles  James,  (grand- 
father) i.  I  ;  Sec.  German 
Society,  i.  2;  his  death,  i.  5. 


Philip,  2d,   (son)   i.  78; 

213  ;  sec  Charlie. 

Edmund  A.,  (uncle)  i.  3,  4,  5. 

Eliza  Anne,  (aunt)  i.  2. 

Frederick    Keller,     (cousin) 

i.  T. 

Harriet  Brown,  (stepmother) 

marriage,  i.  28;  her  goodness, 
i.  29;  letter  to,  i.  58. 

Harriett  Reynolds,  (daugh- 
ter) i.  78;  letters  to,  i.  24; 
314;  contrib.  to  L.  &  M.,  ii. 
215;  letter  to,  (Luther  Biogr.) 
ii.  362 ;  letters  to,  from 
Europe,  ii.  368;  369;  371; 
372;  374;  375;  transl.  Wilden- 
hahn's  Hans  Sachs,  ii.  374, 
note:  marriage,  ii.  367;  letter 
to,  (Bar  Harbor)  ii.  384. 

John  Leyden,    (great  uncle) 

i.  i;  7- 

Martin,  (uncle)  i.  2. 

Julia    Heiskell,    (sister),  see 

Kinsolving. 

Katherine,    (daughter), 

death,  ii.  179. 

Katherine  Doll,  (grand- 
mother), i.  2;  5. 

Louisa,  (aunt),  see  Bittle. 

Mary,  (aunt),  see  Taylor. 

Robert   Lane,    (son),   death, 

ii.  179. 

Taylor,   (uncle),  i.  3,  4. 

Susan  Heiskell,    (daughter), 

i.  78;  death,  i.  138. 

Reynolds,   (wife)   i.  77; 

100;  letters  to,  i.  139;  140; 
144,  (Popular  Amusements)  ; 
152;  209-213;  her  letters  from 
West  Indies,  i.  232;  253. 

Virginia     Baker,      (second 

wife),  i.  270. 

William   Theodore,    (uncle), 

i-  3- 
Krotel :  Rev.  G.  F.,  quoted,  i.  325- 
326 :  succeeds  C.  P.  K.  in  St. 
Clark's,  ii.  24;  proposes  union 
of  Synods,  ii.  27;  first  connec- 
tion with  L.  &  M..  ii.  51; 
Associate  Editor  L.  &  M.,  ii. 
58;    Editor  L.    &   M..   ii.   58; 


428 


INDEX. 


Krotel ;  Rev.  G.  F. ;  Continued: 
Professor  extra-ordinary  in 
Phila.  Sem.,  ii.  141 ;  delegate 
to  Gen.  Synod,  Fort  Wayne, 
ii.  157;  defends  action  of 
Penna.  Synod,  ii.  168;  the 
Galesb.  action,  ii.  206;  C.  P. 
K.  defends  him  against  Dr. 
Ruperti,  ii.  218;  letter  from  C. 
P.  K.,  (105  Theses),  ii.  240; 
his  reply ;  his  own  position  de- 
fined, ii.  240-241 ;  his  candor 
and  manliness  in  G.  C,  ii. 
247 ;  personal  relations  with  C. 
P.  K.  undisturbed,  ii.  247; 
306;  succeeds  J.  A.  S.  as 
Editor-in-Chief  of  L.  &-  M., 
(1879);  "too  good  to  last" 
(C.  P.  K.)  ;  resigns  position,  ii. 
248 ;  letter  on  Cons.  Reforma- 
tion ;  "  the  noblest  contribu- 
tion "  to  the  English  literature 
of  our  Church,  ii.  306;  Eng- 
lish prayer  at  C.  P.  K.'s 
funeral,  ii.  398. 

Krug;  Rev.  Philip,  ii.  247. 

Kunkleman ;  Rev.  J.  A.,  opposes 
Galesburg  Rule,  ii.  206;  de- 
fended by  C.  P.  K.  against  Dr. 
Ruperti,  ii.  218;  joins  Dr. 
Seiss  against  105  Theses  in  G. 
C,  ii.  244. 

Kunze ;  Rev.  J.  Christopher,  leader 
in  N.  Y.  Ministerium,  i.  320; 
first  Lutheran  in  Board  of 
Univ.  of  Penna.,  ii.  251. 

Kurtz;  Rev.  Benjamin,  going 
abroad,  i.  74;  108;  edits  Ob- 
server, i.  Ill;  condemns  Ev. 
Review,  i.  179;  objects  to  long- 
windedness,  i.  135 ;  the  Gen- 
eral Synod,  i.  196 ;  343 ;  ap- 
pointed to  write  Luther 
Biography,  i.  332;  doctrinal 
basis  of  Gen.  Syn.,  i.  335 ; 
vigorous  support  of  S.  S.  S., 
i.  334;  the  Fathers,  i.  344; 
connection  with  Def.  Plat- 
form, i.  357;  ii.  86;  Melanch- 
thon  Synod,  i.  411;  sermon 
against  the  gown,  ii.    13;   re- 


viewed by  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  15 ;  the 
"  dusty  fathers" ;  C.  P.  K.'s 
rebuke,  ii.  17,  18;  influence 
over  Luth.  Observer,  ii.  30; 
protests  against  Gen.  Synod's 
action  at  York,  ii.  134; 
Eulogy  by  Dr.  Hutter;  kindly 
review  by  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  82,  flF. 

Rev.    Daniel,   a    founder   of 

Gen.   Synod,  i.  343. 

Laird;  Rev.  S.,  Delegate  to  Gen. 
Synod,  Fort  Wayne,  ii.  157; 
Hebron  case,  ii.  177. 

L.  &  M. — Lutheran  and  Mission- 
ary. 

Lane;  Dr.,  criticism  of  Luth.  Ob- 
server, i.   177. 

Thomas     H.,     influence     in 

bringing  C.  P.  K.  to  Pittsb.,  i. 
177,  note;  284;  visits  Win- 
chester, i.  273;  letter  from,  i. 
288;  letters  to,  i.  274;  279; 
283;  284;  285;  ii.  178-179, 
(death  of  the  children)  ;  ii. 
299,  (plan  of  Cons.  Reforma- 
tion) ;  his  assistance  in  pub- 
lishing this,  ii.  301 ;  pall 
bearer,  ii.  399. 

Language  Question;  the,  in  Phil- 
ada.,  i.  9;  why  the  English 
was  feared,  i.  169;  171;  losses 
in  the  West,  i.  181 ;  difficulties 
connected  with,  ii.  42 ;  factor 
in  need  of  new  Seminary,  ii. 
149-150;  out  of  place  (Dr. 
Fritschel)    ii.   232. 

Lehman;  H.,  ii.  157. 

Library;  Bucknell,  Reports  on,  ii. 
282. 

Development  of   C.    P.   K.'s, 

in  its  relation  to  his  work :  a 
boy  fond  of  reading,  i.  27 ;  38 ; 
a  "  voracious  reader,"  i.  30 ; 
Anthon's  Classical  Dictionary, 
i.  34;  profound  admiration  for 
the  Classics,  i.  39;  familiarity 
with  English  literature,  i.  39 ; 
172;  ii.  369;  37'^-272;  sys- 
tematic reading,  i.  44;  Bible 
study  in  the  original,  "  pars- 


INDEX. 


429 


Library;  C.  P.  K.'s,  Continued: 
ing  carefully,"  i.  51;  55;  92; 
interest  in  Exegesis,  i.  71 ;  92; 
the  solid  foundation  of  his 
theological  position,  i.  72;  157; 
books  lent  or  given  by  C.  Ph. 
K.,  i.  49;  52;  58;  69;  70;  87; 
89;  198;  199;  ii.  347;  C.  P.  K. 
pleased  with  his  father's 
choice,  i.  56 ;  studying  "  with 
a  few  books,"  i.  50;  57;  taking 
up  German,  i.  55;  71;  100; 
102;  an  "  extra  polish,"  i.  186; 
buying  books,  i.  56 ;  57 ;  the 
Hebrew  fever,  i.  70;  71;  92; 
94;  104;  Chaldee  grammar  re- 
ceived, i.  58 ;  seven  hundred 
volumes  his  joy  and  pride, 
(1844),  i.  69;  99;  how  classi- 
fied, i.  99-100;  he  knew  his 
books,  i.  70;  ii.  298,  note;  the 
library  catalogued ;  motto 
from  Beaumont  and  Fletcher, 
i.  70;  "secret  satisfaction  in 
his  books,"  i.  87;  study  of  the 
Confessions,  i.  72 ;  his  works 
on  Exegesis,  i.  90;  German 
reading,  i.  104 ;  109 ;  warm  in- 
terest in  Liturgies,  i.  155 ;  lit- 
erature of  the  Reformation 
periods,  i.  161;  207;  reading 
French,  i.  186;  specializing  in 
confessional  literature,  (1849), 
i.  167;  186;  187;  "strict  ab- 
stinence "  from  book  buying,  i. 
186;  getting  books  vs.  using 
them,  i.  187 ;  the  love  of  books 
produces  contentment,  i.  189; 
"  so  hungry "  for  books,  i. 
190;  191 ;  Luther  books,  i.  194; 
200;  203;  ii.  364,  note;  yil \  a 
"  very  fair  show "  in  parch- 
ment and  stamped  hogskin,  i. 
198;  "some  very  valuable 
books,"  i.  200 ;  "  very  ancient, 
rare  and  rich  works,"  i.  203 ; 
"  leaning  too  much  to  the 
ancients,"  (C.  Ph.  K,  1850), 
i.  204 ;  Fathers  and  Church 
History;  Chrysostom,  i.  158; 
"  quite      a      decent      patristic 


library  for  a  country  parson;" 
list  of  the  Fathers  (1852),  i. 
207;  nature  books,  i.  215;  the 
library  in  1855,  i.  287 ;  works 
on  the  Augsb.  Confession,  i. 
302;  books  of  practical  reli- 
gious character,  i.  310;  trad- 
ing for  a  fine  edition  of 
Chrysostom,  i.  313;  preparing 
for  the  battle,  (1856); 
"gathering  up"  Lutheranism; 
looking  eagerly  for  Calovius, 
i-  375 ;  "  elegant  books "  to 
"  swop  for  any  old  Lutheran 
trash,"  i.  376;  C.  P.  K.  among 
his  books,  ii.  267;  308;  his 
library  at  the  service  of  his 
friends,  i.  149;  192;  ii.  267; 
books  collected  in  translating 
Ulrici,  (1874),  ii.  271;  the 
library  reflecting  his  varied 
interests,  ii.  281 ;  plans  to  pur- 
chase it  for  the  University,  ii. 
297 ;  its  value  and  scope  in 
1879;  large  ratio  of  rare 
books ;  the  collection  of  Bibles, 
ii.  298;  the  library  presented 
to  the  Lutheran  Theol.  Semi- 
nary (1883)  ;  the  Krauth  Me- 
morial Library,  (1908),  ii.  298. 

Library;  the,  aim  of  a  good 
library,  i.  187 ;  ii.  284 ;  289 ; 
292-293 ;  specializing  in,  ii. 
286;  "catacombs  of  the  intel- 
lectual world,"  ii.  287 ;  the 
general  library  a  compromise, 
ii.  289 ;  the  local  library ;  ac- 
cumulative value  of  historical 
documents,  ii.  295 ;  the  poor 
parson's  library,  ii.  340. 

What  it  is,  and  what  it 

ought  to  be ;  Stoddart's  Re- 
viezv,  ii.  283-297. 

Life  Questions  of  Lutheranism, 
Life  Questions  of  Christian- 
ity;  (Lecture),  ii.  177. 

Lincoln's  Address  at  Gettysburg, 
ii.  72. 

Lintner ;  Rev.  G.  A.,  "  Ecclesiasti- 
cal Standards"  (Ev.  Review), 
quoted,  i.  355. 


430 


INDEX. 


Literary  Criticism ;  extracts  from 
C.  P.  K.'s  reviews,  ii.  338-360; 
Just  Criticism,  ii.  338;  "quota- 
tions "  the  severest  part  of 
book  notices,  ii.  358. 

Liturgies  of  the  Churches  of  the 
Reformation,  i.  259. 

Liturgy  of  Penna.  Synod,  (1842)  ; 
translated,  i.  154;  changes  pro- 
posed by  Comm.  of  Va.  Synod, 
(C.  P.  K.  and  B.  M.  S.),  i. 
155 ;  see  Church  Book. 

Lochmann;  Rev.  A.  H.,  ii.  168. 

Rev.     George,    Reformation 

Jubilee,  i.  322;  a  founder  of 
Gen.   Synod,  i.  343. 

Rev.  W.  H.,  i.  362. 

London ;  general  views  of,  ii.  372. 
Lord's  Day ;  Augsburg  Confession 

and  the,  ii.   116;  117;   122;  C. 

P.  K.'s  position  concerning,  ii. 

115;  118;  119;  120-126;  in  the 

Large    Catechism,    ii.    121 ;    in 

the  Small  Catechism,  ii.   122; 

views     of     prominent     Luth. 

theologians,      ii.      125,      126; 

Romish  vs.  Evangelical  views, 

ii.  117. 
" is  the  Word's  Day,"  ii. 

122. 
Luth.  Church  and  Divine 

Obligation  of,  from  art.   (Ev. 

Review),  ii.  116. 
Lord's  Supper ;  the,  see  also  Real 

Presence      and      Sacramental 

Presence ;  letters  from  C.  Ph. 

K.,   i.    107;    108;    Dr.    Nevin's 

views,  i.  107. 
Loy;     Rev.     M.,     Ed.     of     Luth. 

Standard,  ii.  47 ;  opening  ser- 
mon, Reading  Convention,  ii. 

174;    correspondence    with    C. 

P.  K.,  ii.  234. 
Luthardt;  Dr.  C.  E.    Letter  from. 

Cons.   Reformation,   ii.   311. 
Luther     Biography ;     desired     by 

Gen.    Synod    (1841),    i.    33i ; 
various      authors      proposed ; 

never  published,  i.  332;  C.  P. 

K.'s  fitness  for  the  work,   (B. 

M.  S.)  ;  action  of  Pittsburgh 


Synod,  ii.  361 ;  approved  by 
Dr.  Krotel,  ii.  362;  C.  P.  K. 
"  getting  ready  for  Luther,"  ii. 
362 ;  the  " ideal  biographer" 
(Dr.  Thompson),  ii.  362-363; 
C.  P.  K.'s  journey  abroad,  ii. 
363,  fif. ;  see  Europe ;  enthusi- 
asm for  the  work ;  almost 
continuous  narrative  up  to 
Worms ;  over  400  pages,  ii. 
377-378 ;  extracts  from  Mss., 
ii.  378-381. 

Martin,  not  the  first  Pro- 
testant, i.  68 ;  most  vigorous 
of  controversialists,  ii.  78;  to 
be  viewed  with  candor,  i.  124; 
his  profound  reverence,  i.  130, 
131;  Calvinism,  ii.  327;  his 
wit,  ii.  346 ;  in  Coburg,  ii.  376. 

Lutheran  and  Home  Journal,  i860; 
(the  quarto  Ltitheran),  ii.  28. 

and    Missionary;    the,    1861, 

ii.  28,  ff. ;  on  the  true  consti- 
tut.  basis  of  Gen.  Synod,  ii.  31 ; 
program,  ii.  34;  not  partisan, 
ii-  35,  36;  pressing  need  of,  ii. 
41 ;  Civil  War,  ii.  48 ;  52 ;  high 
literary  standard,  ii.  49;  in- 
creasing strength,  ii.  51 ;  C.  P. 
K.  resigns  editorship  to  Com- 
mittee (1867),  ii.  57;  his 
work,  ii.  58;  L.  cS-  M.  a  power 
for  confessional  Lutheranism, 
ii.  154;  storm  over  Galesburg 
Rule,  ii.  206,  ff. ;  C.  P.  K.  on 
Purity  of  Pulpit,  Sanctity  of 
Altar,  ii.  209;  2x9;  239;  en- 
dorsed by  chairmen  of  Galesb. 
delegations,  ii.  211;  atten- 
tively read  in  Gettysb.,  ii.  230; 
Editor  of  L.  &  M.  invites  cor- 
respondents to  "  more  thor- 
ough examination  and  closer 
thinking,"  ii.  211  ;  a  "  storm  of 
senselessness,"  ii.  212,  flF. ; 
editorial  position  of  L.  &  M. 
strongly  radical,  ii.  214;  ex- 
posure of  shallow  unionism, 
ii.  215;  the  congregations 
and  the  Rule,  ii.  217;  "per- 
sonal allusions"  condemned  by 


INDEX. 


431 


Lutheran  and  Missionary ;  Con- 
tinued: 
C.  P.  K.,  ii.  2i8;  tribute  to  C. 
P.  K.'s  power  in  debate,  (ed- 
itorial, J.  A.  S.)  ii.  244-245; 
Dr.  Krotel  Editor-in-chief ;  C. 
P.  K.'s  gratification ;  Dr. 
Krotel  resigns,  ii.  248;  C.  P. 
K.  unable  to  continue  his  rela- 
tions to  L.  &  3/.,  ii.  249. 

Lutheran  Church ;  the,  in  danger 
of  dying  of  pure  dignity,  i. 
126;  article  on,  quoted,  i.  129; 
true  position  conservative,  (C. 
Ph.  K.),  i.  371;  an  acknowl- 
edged power,  i.  ;i77 ;  ii.  58 ;  an 
honest  church,  ii.  95;  if  a 
failure,  a  failure  forever,  ii. 
98;  her  doctrines  cannot  be 
changed,  ii.   loi. 

Literature ;      need     of,     in 

America,  i.  169 ;  182 ;  Sym- 
bolical Books  transl.,  i.  206; 
see  Henkel ;  Gen.  Synod 
recommends  Arndt's  True 
Christianity,   i.   331. 

Observer,     1833 ;     see     also 

Kurtz,  Rev.  B. ;  not  repre- 
senting Church,  i.  177;  hostile 
to  Luth.  Confessions;  Dr.  B. 
Kurtz's  influence  over,  ii.  30; 
he  made  it  a  power,  ii.  85 ; 
outspoken  radicalism,  ii.  31 ; 
dissatisfaction  with,  ii.  s^'.  "a 
dark  and  bloody  ground,"  ii. 
84;  i.  344;  a  powerful  rival,  ii. 
33;  influence  of  the  Lutheran, 
ii.  84;  new  editors,  ii.  85; 
Fundamental  Doctrines,  ii. 
113;  violent  articles  against 
Penna.  Synod,  ii.  153. 

Lutheran  View  not  invented  by 
Luther,  i.  121  ;  defined,  i.  122. 

of  Real   Presence;  art. 

prepared  for  Luth.  Observer, 
1846.    quoted,   i.    121-134. 

Lutheranism ;  Historical,  Defend- 
ed, from  edit.  L.  &■  M.,  ii.  "j"]. 

Old  and  New  School,  i.  316; 

of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church 
in   this   country    (Dr.   Mann), 


quoted,  i.  317-318;  Evangelical 
(C.  P.  K.),  i.  401;  not  to  be 
tolerated  but  to  rule,  ii.  100; 
"  genuine  Christianity,"  ii. 
112;  a  test  of  Lutheranism, 
from  edit.  L.  &  A/.,  ii.  103. 

Lutherans  not  non-Catholic  Pro- 
testants, ii.  189. 

Lutherische  Zeitschrift;  Rudel- 
bach  and  Guerike's,  i.  199. 

Luther's  Cradle  Smile,  i.  93. 

Germany,  ii.  378. 

Lyman ;  Rev.  Dr.,  of  Pittsburgh, 
i.  288. 

Mann  ;  Rev.  W.  J.,  Henry  Mel- 
chior  Muehlenberg,  i.  317; 
Doctrinal  position  of  F'athers, 
i.  318;  Convention  of  Gen. 
Synod  in  Dayton,  i.  354;  "A 
Plea  for  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession," i.  361 ;  connected 
with  L.  &  M.,  ii.  52;  debate 
on  the  Sabbath,  ii.  124;  first 
German  Professor  in  Phila. 
Seminary,  ii.  141  ;  Chairman 
of  Comm.  to  prepare  Frater- 
nal Address,  ii.  164;  Gales- 
burg  Rule,  ii.  227 1  German 
address  at  C.  P.  K.'s  funeral, 
ii.  398. 

Marsden ;  Rev.  J.  H.,  Professor  in 
Penna.  College,  i.  29. 

Martinsburg,  Va. ;  birthplace  of  C. 
P.  K.,  i.  26;  with  Shepherds- 
town,  C.  Ph.  K.'s  first  charge, 
i.  8;  consecration  of  ceme- 
tery, i.  26. 

pastorate    of    C.    P.    K.,   see 

under  Krauth ;  Charles  Por- 
terfield. 

Maryland  and  Virginia;  Synod  of, 
organized  1820,  i.  1 10 ;  repre- 
sented in  org.  of  Gen.  Synod, 
i-  324- 

Maryland ;  Synod  of,  prominent 
men  in ;  C.  P.  K.  licensed, 
1841 ;  ordained,  1842,  i.  no; 
New  Measures  vs.  Symbolism, 
i.  Ill;  Abstract  of  Doctrine, 
i.  Ill,  fif. 


432 


INDEX. 


Mass ;    the    Evangelical    and    the 

Romish,  {Missionary)  i.  376. 
Materialism,   ii.   278,   ff. 
May     Day     Coronation ;     Article 

( Observer) ,   1.   82. 
Mayer;  Rev.  Philip  F.,  founder  of 

Gen.   Synod,  i.  343 ;   chose  C. 

P.  K.  as  his  successor,  i.  290. 
McConaughy ;  Mr.  and  Mrs.  David, 

i.   77- 
McCosh ;    Dr.,   The    Emotions,   ii. 

353 ;  a  lucid  writer,  ii.  354. 
McKee;  Rev.  D.,  ii.  177. 
Meade;    .Rev.     Wm.,     Bishop    of 

Virginia,    i.    269. 
Mechell ;  Dr.,  Bishop  of  Toulouse, 

i.  3- 
Melanchthon  ;  his  character,  i.  124; 

the    Real     Presence,    i.     164; 

Loci     Communes ;     new     ed. 

undertaken  by  C.  P.  K.,  i.  174; 

187 ;  a  cherished  idea,  i.  207. 
Synod  ;  representing  advanced 

Am.  Lutheranism,  i.  411. 
Melhorn;  Rev.  J.  K.,  ii.  177. 
Mercersburg   Review ;    Person    of 

Christ,  transl.  C.  P.  K.,  i.  157; 

183;    199;    Dr.   Jacobs'   article 

on  Cons.  Reformation,  ii.  306; 

review  of  Dr.  Hodge,  ii.  315. 
Metaphor  defined,  ii.   108. 
Michigan    Synod ;    Reading    Con- 
vention,    ii.     174;     Galesburg 

Rule,  ii.  221. 
Miller  ;  Reuben,  ii.  399. 

William,  of  Winchester,  i.  275. 

Milton ;  Hesiod,  Homer  and  Virgil 

in  one,  i.  40. 
Ministerial     sessions     denounced; 

sustained     by     East      Penna. 

Synod,  ii.  26,  27. 
Ministerium  of  Pennsylvania;  see 

Penna.    Synod. 
Ministry  of  the  Gospel ;  Thetical 

statement  of   Doctrine,  L.   & 

M.,    ii.    194. 
Minnesota ;     Synod     of,    Reading 

Convention,  ii.   174;  what  are 

Fundamental      errorists?      ii. 

202;  withdraws  from  G.  C,  ii. 

203 ;  see  General  Council. 


Missionary ;  the,  union  with 
Standard  talked  of,  i.  177; 
articles  by  C.  P.  K.,  1856-1860, 
i.  300;  301;  ii.  115;  notice  of 
transl.  Tholuck,  quoted,  i.  305  ; 
to  be  the  church  paper,  i.  312; 
"  antidote  to  Observer,"  i. 
;i72 ;  united  with  Lutheran, 
ii.  34- 

Missouri ;  Synod  of,  not  in  Gen. 
Synod,  i.  350;  principles  of 
church  government,  ii.  172; 
Reading  convention,  ii.  174; 
relations  to  G.  C,  ii.  219;  236. 

"  Monkey  in  the  palm  tree,"  ii.  72. 

Monroe ;  James,  of  St.  Mark's,  i. 
292 ;   letter  to,   i.   293. 

Montgomery;  poetic  license  cor- 
rected, i.  224. 

"  Moral  obligation  not  annihilated 
by  being  ignored,"  ii.  97. 

Morris ;  Chas.  A.,  reminiscences 
of  C.  Ph.  K.  quoted,  i.  6. 

Rev.  J.  G.,  reminiscences  of 

C.  Ph.  K.,  i.  6;  sends  C.  P. 
K.  to  Canton,  i.  43 ;  45 ;  letters 
to  C.  Ph.  K.,  i.  44;  54;  kind- 
ness of,  i.  50;  prophecy  of  C. 
P.  K.,  i.  55;  advice  to  C.  P. 
K.,  i.  105 ;  going  abroad,  i. 
108;  ordination  sermon,  i. 
no;  preaching  in  Washing- 
ton, i.  151 ;  values  C.  P.  K.'s 
work  in  Ev.  Review,  i.  179; 
admires  spirit  of  G.  C,  ii. 
245 ;  First  Free  Diet,  ii.  324. 

"  Mouth  a  Papist,  the  Pen  a  Pro- 
testant,"  ii.    Id ;   i.   417. 

Muehlenberg;  Rev.  F.  A.,  on  first 
Board  of  Univ.  of  Penna.,  ii. 
251- 

Rev.  Prof.  F.  A.,  letter  from 

Dr.  Hay,  i.  30;  signs  Pacific 
Overture,  i.  362 ;  obituary  of 
C.   P.  K.,  ii.  395. 

Rev.    H.    A.,    a    founder    of 

Gen.  Synod,  i.  343. 

Rev.  Henry  Melchoir,  friend 

of  Christian  Streit's  father,  i. 
271 ;  Patriarch  of  Luth. 
Church  in  America,  i.  317. 


INDEX. 


433 


Muehlenberg;  J.  Peter  G.,  gra- 
duate of  College  of  Phila.,  ii. 
250;  Pres.  German  Soc,  i.  2. 

Mullen;  S.  M.,  letter  to,  i.  239. 

Mulock;   Dinah  M.,  ii.  352. 

National  Crisis  ;  the,  ii.  59,  ff. ; 
after  the  war,  ii.  74;  mercy 
and  justice,  ii.  76. 

Neander ;  Tholuck's  John  dedi- 
cated to,  i.  303. 

Neology;  mission  of,  i.  126;  char- 
acteristics of,  i.  127;  129,  note; 
contrasted  with  Deism,  i.  127. 

Nevin ;  Dr.  J.  W.,  reviews  Con- 
servative Reformation,  ii.  307. 

"New  Measures,"  i.  67;  party  in 
Maryland  Synod,  i.  1 10. 

School  party  and  C.  Ph.  K., 

i.  374.  See  also  Schmucker, 
S.  S.,  and  Kurtz,  B. 

New  York ;  C  P.  K.  called  to,  i. 
150;  the  city  in  1848,  i.   151. 

New  York  Synod ;  early  confes- 
sional position,  i.  317;  and  the 
Episcopal  Church,  i.  319;  influx 
of  rationalism,  i.  320;  repre- 
sented in  org.  of  Gen.  Synod, 
i.  324;  founds  professorship 
in  Phila.  Sem.,  ii.  141  ;  the 
Fraternal  Address,  ii.  167;  its 
officers  at  Reading  conven- 
tion, ii.  169;  174;  leaves  Gen. 
Syn. ;  minority  withdraws,  ii. 
169;  it  becomes  almost  exclu- 
sively German,  ii.   170. 

Newspaper  Literature ;  Luth. 
Church  and  her,  editorial,  L. 
&  M.,  ii.  42. 

Newspapers ;  value  of,  ii.  294. 

North  Carolina ;  Synod  of,  repr. 
in  org.  Gen.  Synod,  i.  324. 

Northern  Illinois ;  Synod  of,  re- 
ceived into  Gen.  Synod,  i.  352. 

Norton ;  C.  F.,  endows  first  Eng- 
lish professorship  in  Phila. 
Sem.,  ii.  141 ;  del.  Gen.  Synod 
in  Fort  Wayne,  ii.  157. 

Norwegian  Synod ;  repr.  at  Read- 
ing Convention,  ii.   174. 

Novel  reading,  ii.  345. 

28 


Observer;  Lutheran,  see  Luth- 
eran Observer. 

Oecolampadius,   i.    134. 

Ohio;  District  Synod  of.  Gales- 
burg  Rule,  ii.  221. 

Joint  Synod  of,  not  in  or- 
ganization of  Gen.  Syn.,  i. 
324;  again  invited  to  join  it, 
i-  350. 

Olive  Branch;  art.  of  S.  S.  S. 
quoted,  i.  338-339)  merged  in 
L.  &  M.,  ii.  34. 

Olympus;  Letter  from,  ii.  215. 

"  Opinions  a  duty,"  ii.  66. 

Oriental  Society;  American,  C.  P. 
K.  elected  to,  ii.  320;  Prince- 
ton convention  of,  ii.  320-321 ; 

Our  Country;  editorial  L.  &  M., 
ii.   61. 

Pacific  Overture,  1856;  i.  362;  a 
compromise,  i.  363. 

Pageants ;  Two,  tribute  to  Lin- 
coln, quoted,  ii.  jt,. 

"  Partisanship  great  in  a  short 
race ;  principle  in  the  long 
run,"  ii.  212. 

Passavant;  Rev.  W.  A.,  licensed, 
i.  no;  letter  from,  i.  274;  his 
activity,  i.  284;  his  philan- 
thropy, i.  302;  372:  publishes 
Missionary,  i.  376 ;  ii.  52 ;  "  an 
antidote  to  Observer,"  i.  372; 
his  motion  at  York,  ii.  133; 
co-editor  of  L.  &  M.,  ii.  34; 
on  editorial  committee,  ii.  58; 
protests  against  action  of 
Gen.  Synod  at  Fort  Wayne, 
ii.  160;  letter  to  C.  P.  K.  on 
Galesb.  Rule,  ii.  224;  last  let- 
ter to  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  396. 

Pastor;  annual  election  of,  i.  61. 

Pastoral  Office;  Benefits  of  the, 
farewell  sermon,  Baltimore,  i. 

78-. 
Patristic  period ;  see  Fathers. 
Paxton;  Rev.   Dr.,  of  Pittsburgh, 

i.  288. 
Paying  work   not   the  best  work, 

i.  259. 


434 


INDEX. 


Pearson ;  Mrs.  Sarah  Schrack, 
kindness  of,  i.  34;  letters  to, 
i-  35;  46,  (Canton);  57,  (an 
inexperienced  boy)  ;  60, 
(leaving  Canton)  ;  66-67, 
(abuses  in  revivals). 

Pennsylvania  College ;  chartered 
1832;  C.  Ph.  K.  professor  in, 
1833;  President  of,  1834,  i.  11; 
notice  of  its  Catalogue,  (C.  P. 
K.  in  Observer)  i.  35-42. 

Synod  of,  rights  of  minori- 
ties, i.  329;  its  earlier  rela- 
tions to  (jen.  Synod,  i.  325 ; 
328;  after  York  Convention, 
ii.  152;  its  "leavening  influ- 
ence" and  activity,  ii.  153;  Dr. 
Sprecher's  view,  ii.  155-156; 
condemned  as  schismatic  by 
West  Penna.  Synod,  ii.  168. 

Chronology: 

1748.  Founded  by  Muehlen- 
berg,  i.  317;  position  unmis- 
takably Lutheran,  i.  318. 

1792.  Adopts  new  Consti- 
tution, omitting  reference  to 
confessions,  i.  319. 

1817.  Luther  Jubilee;  vari- 
ous denominations  inviied  to 
join  in  its  celebration,  i.  322. 

1818.  First  move  toward 
founding  Gen.  Synod,  i.  323. 

1819.  C.  Ph.  K.  licensed, 
Baltimore,  i.  8. 

1819-22.  Unionism  in,  i. 
320 ;  "  misunderstood  "  by  cer- 
tain congregations,  i.  325. 

1820.  With  other  Synods 
organizes  Gen.   bynod,  i.  324. 

1823.  Withdraws  from  (jen. 
Synod,  i.  324;  328;  354. 

1829.  Socinian  tendencies 
suspected,  i.  324. 

1835.  Urged  to  return  to 
Gen.   Synod,  i.  349. 

1842.  German  Liturgy  pub- 
lished, i.   154. 

1850.  Symbolical  Books 
only  standard  of  Lutheran- 
ism,  but  subscription  to  them 
not  required,  i.  201  ;  relations 


with  Gettysburg,  i.  190;  sec- 
ond professorship,  i.  190;  201  ; 
35c. 

1853.  Returns  to  Gen. 
Synod,  i.  349;  350;  its  action 
quoted,  i.  351;  ii.  132;  a  man- 
ly document ;  cordial  recep- 
tion, i.  352. 

1860.  Recommends  use  of 
gown,  ii.  13. 

1864.  Its  delegation  pro- 
tests against  admission  of 
Franckean  Synod  to  Gen. 
Synod,  ii.  131  ;  withdraws,  ii. 
132;  Synod  placated  by  Gen. 
Synod's  later  action,  ii.  134; 
138;  new  Theological  Sem- 
inary undertaken,  ii.  139. 

1865.  C.  P.  K.  received  into 
Ministerium,  ii.  27 ;  put  on  Ch. 
B.  Committee,  ii.  190;  Synod 
endows  German  professor- 
ship in  Sem.,  ii.  141 ;  its  repre- 
sentatives rejected  at  Gettys- 
burg, ii.   153. 

1866.  Its  delegation  re- 
jected by  Gen.  Synod  (Fort 
Wayne),  ii.  160;  revision  of 
its  Constitution ;  declaration 
of  faith  as  proposed  by  C.  P. 
K.  adopted  bv  rising  vote;  its 
connection  with  Gen.  Syn. 
dissolved,  ii.  161 ;  steps  to 
form  new  general  body,  ii. 
167;  (cf.  letter  of  C.  P.  K.,  i. 
193)  ;  Fraternal  Address,  ii. 
164 ;  167 ;  Reading  Conven- 
tion, ii.   173-176. 

1876.  Galesburg  Rule;  re- 
marks of  C.  P.  K. ;  report  of 
delegates  to  G.  C,  ii.  220; 
221. 

1880.  C.  P.  K.  asked  to 
prepare  Life  of  Luther,  ii. 
362. 

Pepper ;  Dr.  Wm.,  Provost  of 
University  (1881),  ii.  257;  C. 
P.  K.'s  address  at  inaugura- 
tion,  ii.   257-258. 

Person  of  Christ;  transl.  from 
Schmid's  Dogmatik,  i.   157. 


IXDEX. 


435 


Pflueger:  Rev.  A.,  letters  to:  Dr. 
Krotcl  and  L.  &  A/.,  ii.  248; 
Predestination  controversy,  ii. 
327;  Luther  Biography,  ii. 
362. 

Philosophy;  C.  P.  K.  as  teacher 
of,  (Dr.  Haas)  ii.  267,  flf. ; 
his  own  position  (Dr. 
Thompson)   ii.  270. 

Pittsburgh ;  first  English  Luth. 
Church  in,  call  declined  by  C. 
P.  K.,  i.  271;  visit  to,  i.  273; 
importance  of,  i.  274;  second 
call,  i.  274,  275 ;  declined,  i. 
276-279 ;  second  visit  to,  i. 
282 ;  cf.  Lane,  Thomas  H. ; 
third  call  accepted,  i.  286;  co- 
temporary  pastors ;  C.  P.  K. 
at  his  best,  i.  288 ;  congrega- 
tion described,  i.  289;  call 
from  St.  John's,  i.  290;  from 
St.  Mark's,  i.  291 ;  resolutions 
of  Council,  i.  295;  farewell 
sermon,  i.  298. 

Synod;   organization    (1845) 

and  activity,  i.  274;  received 
into  Gen.  Synod  (1853),  i. 
352 ;  action  on  Definite  Plat- 
form, i.  2)T] ;  adopted  in  part 
by  Gen.  Synod,  ii.  133;  "an 
adroit  piece  of  thimble-rig," 
ii.  138;  the  Fraternal  Address, 
ii.  167 ;  condemns  action  of 
Gen.  Synod  at  Fort  Wayne, 
ii.  169;  Reading  Convention, 
ii.  169;  174;  minority  with- 
draws, ii.  169;  litigation  over 
church  property ;  first  Eng- 
lish Ch.  Pittsb.  divided,  ii. 
176;  Galesb.  Rule,  ii.  221;  re- 
quests C.  P.  K.  to  prepare 
Life  of  Luther,  ii.  361. 
Plagiarism ;  requires  genius,  ii. 
339;  digesting  a  book  is  not 
stealing,  ii.  343 ;  i.  423. 
Plitt;  Rev.  John  K.,  pastor  of  St. 
Stephen's;  funeral  service  of 
C.  P.  K.  in  house,  ii.  398. 
Plummer;  Rev.  Dr.,  of  Pitts- 
burgh, i.  288. 


Poems;  juvenile,  i.  32;  A  Tribute, 
i.  262 ;  Cosmos,  ii.  385 ;  Micro- 
cosmos,   ii.   392. 

Politics  and  Religion;  (Caesar 
and  God),  edit.  L.  &  A/.,  ii.  66. 

Poor  Sermons ;  how  to  commit,  i. 
63. 

Popular  Amusements ;  sermon,  i. 
144;  quoted,  i.  145-147;  sec- 
ond edition,  i.  145 ;  J.  A.  S. 
delighted ;  letter  from,  i.  148, 
149;  B.  M.  S.,  i.  191;  demand 
for,  in  West  Indies,  i.  239. 

"  Popularity  purchased  at  the  ex- 
pense of  truth,"  ii.  55. 

Poverty  prevalent  in  tropics,  i. 
219. 

Three    Essays    on,    i.    301  ; 

quoted,   i.   218-219. 

Preaching  with  Fulness,  i.  63. 

Predestination  Controversy  in 
Synodical  Conference ;  both 
sides  anxious  for  C.  P.  IC's 
opinion,  ii.  326 ;  letter  to  Rev. 
A.  Pflueger,  ii.  327;  frag- 
ment of  a  review  by  C.  P.  K., 
of  Dr.  Walther's  tract,  ii.  328. 

Pretz;  C,  ii.   157. 

Prime;   Rev.   S.   Irenaeus,  Evang. 

Alliance,  ii.  272. 
Princeton ;  C.  P.  K.'s  relations 
with ;  friendship  with  its  Pro- 
fessors ;  invited  to  contribute 
to  Revieti' :  invited  to  preach, 
ii.  319;  hospitality  enjoyed,  ii. 
321  ;  Dr.  McCosh  and  the 
"  Emotions,"  ii.  353. 
Private        Communion ;        article 

quoted,  i.  76. 
Progress   of    Error;    three   stages 
in,  from  edit.  L.  &  M.,  ii.  89; 
166. 
Protestant      denominations ;      one 
should    eventually    absorb    all 
the  rest,  (Dr.  H.  L  Schmidt) 
ii.  242. 
Protracted  meetings,  i.  272. 
Provost  and  vice-provost,  ii.  256, 

257- 
Pulpit  aids,  ii.  342. 


436 


INDEX. 


Punch ;  the  London,  "  best  pre- 
paration for  visiting  Eng- 
land," ii.  369. 

Purity  of  the  Pulpit ;  and  Sanctity 
of  the  Altar;  C.  P.  K.'s 
series  of  articles  in  L.  &  M. ; 
first  art.  quoted,  ii.  209;  "  pro- 
found and  complete  defense  " 
of  confessional  position,  ii. 
219. 

Quitman  ;  Rev.  F.  H.,  rationalism 
in  New  York  Synod,  i.  320. 

Rationalism  ;  influence  of,  on  the 
Church,   i.  320;   383. 

Reading  Convention;  ii.  173,  ff. 

Real  Presence;  Doctrine  of  the, 
C.  Ph.  K.'s  view,  i.  108;  Prof. 
Stuart's  article,  i.  115;  re- 
viewed by  C.  P.  K.,  i.  117,  ff. ; 
logical  statement  of  doctrine, 
i.  120;  Lutheran  view  of,  i. 
121,  ff. ;  Luther's  position,  i. 
134;  "a  real  presence,"  (C.  P. 
K.  1845)  i.  136;  view  of 
Amer.  L.  Church,  i.  162; 
Melanchthon's  views,  i.  164; 
doctrine  assailed  by  Observer, 
i.  185,  note ;  no  "  satisfactory 
refutation "  of  Augsb.  Con- 
fession concerning,  (letter,  C. 
P.  K.  to  B.  M.  S.)  i.  192. 

"  Rebuke  sharply,"  a  moral  duty, 
ii.  92. 

Reck  ;  Rev.  Abram,  pastor  in  Win- 
chester, i.  8;  baptised  C.  P. 
K.,  i.  26. 

References ;  a  good  habit,  i.  203. 

Reformed  Messenger;  Dr.  Nevin's 
rev.  of  Cons.  Ref.  quoted,  ii. 

307. 

Reformed  Protestantism ;  to  swal- 
low up  Lutheranism,  (Stuart) 
i.  116;  conservative  tendency 
in,  i.  119;  "put  on  trial"  by 
Cons.  Ref.   (Nevin)   ii.  308. 

Reformers  compared,  i.    124. 

Reinhard ;  Rev.  F.  V.,  Reforma- 
tion sermon  transl.,  i.  298. 

Religious  light  literature,  ii.  344. 


"  Reproach   safer  than  praise,"   ii. 

Si- 
Review  ;  a  Lutheran,  proposed  by 
Dr.  Hill,  with  C.  P.  K.  editor, 
ii.  322;  Lutheran  Church  Re- 
view est.  1882,  ii.  324;  publ. 
C.  P.  K.'s  sketch  on  Pre- 
destination, ii.  331. 
Reviewers;  advice  to,  (C.  Ph.  K.) 

i.  204. 
Revival  Meeting;   Subjects  for,  i. 

65. 
Reynolds  family :  Harriet  Kell, 
(wife's  stepmother)  i.  139. 
Isaac,  (father-in-law)  i.  77; 
his  death,  i.  154.  Mary  M. 
Hoffmann,  (mother-in-law)  i. 
yj.  Susan,  see  Krauth,  Susan 
R. 

Rev.    Wm.    M.,    establ.    Ev. 

Revietv,  i.  13;  i.  175,  ff. ; 
Principal  of  Gettysb.  Gym- 
nasium, i.  28;  professor  in 
Penna.  College,  i.  29;  2>7\ 
President  of  Capital  Univ.,  i. 
180;  to  write  Luther  Biogra- 
phy, i.  332 ;  desires  editorship 
of  L.  &-  M..  ii.  39;  joins 
Episcopal  Church,  i.  332. 

Rice;  Mr.  of  Canton,  i.  46;  53. 
Richards ;    Rev.    J.    W.,    proposed 
transl.    of    Halle'sche    Nachr., 

Riddle ;  Rev.  Dr.,  of  Pittsburgh,  i. 

288. 
Riehlc  family ;  Philadelphia,  i.  220. 
Roanoke  College  ;  Address  quoted, 

ii.  60. 
Romanism  and  Protestantism,  i.  68. 
Roth ;   Rev.   H.   W.,   Hebron  case, 

ii.   177. 
"  Rule  of  Faith"  defined,  ii.  143. 
Ruperti ;    Dr.    J.,    propositions    on 

Pulpit  and  Altar  Fellowship; 

led    to    adoption    of    Galesb. 

Rule,  ii.  205 ;  letter  to,  ii.  218. 

Sabbath    Question  ;    see    Lord's 
Dav. 

Theses  on,  C.  P.  K.,  in  Pas- 
toral Association,  ii.  124. 


INDEX. 


A2>7 


Sachs  ;  Hans,  memorials  and  mon- 
ument, ii.  373 ;  his  grave,  ii. 
374;  Wildenhahn's,  translated, 
ii.   374,  note. 

Sacramental  Presence  of  Christ; 
View  of  American  Luth. 
Church,  article,  i.  162,  ff. 

Sadtler;  Rev.  B.,  read  Lessons  at 
funeral  of  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  398. 

Santa  Cruz;  arrival  in,  i.  218; 
letters  from,  i.  253-260. 

Sarver;  Rev.  J.,  Pastor  of  Hebron 
church,  ii.   177. 

"  Sauce  piquante ;"  how  to  enjoy 
being  abused,  from  edit.  L.  & 
M.,  ii.  93. 

Sauerwein ;  Peter,  of  Baltimore, 
i-  93- 

SchaefFer ;  Rev.  C.  F.,  Henkel's 
Symb.  Books,  i.  206 ;  un- 
flinching orthodoxy,  i.  19;  ii. 
237;  professor  in  Phila.  Sem- 
inary, ii.  141  ;  letter  to  Dr. 
Jacobs,  quoted,  ii.  124;  letter 
to  C.  P.  K.,  Conserv.  Re- 
formation, ii.  304. 

Rev.    C.    W.,   installation   of 

C.  P.  K.,  St.  Mark's,  ii.  i; 
connected  with  L.  &■  M.,  ii. 
51 ;  associate  editor  of  L.  & 
M.,  ii.  57 ;  chairman  Penna. 
delegation  at  York,  ii.  131  ; 
urges  need  of  Seminary,  ii. 
140;  Professor  extra-ordinary 
in  Sem.,  ii.  141 ;  del.  to  Gen. 
Synod,  Fort  Wayne,  ii.  157; 
on  Committee,  Minnesota 
Question,  ii.  202 ;  Galesb. 
Rule,  ii.  2S7 ;  letter  from, 
(General  Council)  ii.  245; 
Trustee  of  University,  ii.  251 ; 
English  address  at  funeral  of 
C.  P.  K.,  ii.  398;  died,  1898,  ii. 

251- 

Rev.    D.    turns    C.    Ph.    K.'s 

mind  to  the  ministry,  i.  7; 
edits  Ev.  L.  Intelligencer,  i.  8; 
a  founder  of  Gen.  Synod,  i. 
343;  charge  to  Prof.  S.  S.  S., 
i-  336. 


Rev.    Fr.    Chr.,   Reformation 

Jubilee,    (1817)    i.   322. 

Rev.   H.,  a  founder  of  Gen. 

Synod,  i.  343. 

Schaff ;  Rev.  Philip,  Evangelical 
Alliance,  ii.  272;  322;  letters 
to  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  281;  322; 
Lange's  Commentary,  ii.  321  ; 
Bible  Revision,  ii.  331  ;  tribute 
to  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  332. 

Schmauk;  Rev.  Th.  E.,  C.  P.  K. 
in  Seminary  (Indicator)  ii. 
144-146;   277,   note. 

Schmid ;  Heinrich,  Dogmatik  re- 
viewed by  C.  Ph.  K.,  i.  20; 
199;  transl.  of,  i.  23,  note; 
the  Person  of  Christ,  transl. 
C.  P.  K.,  i.  157;  183. 

Schmidt ;  Rev.  H.  I.,  Tribute  to 
C.  Ph.  K.,  i.  17;  letter  to,  (C. 
Ph.  K.)  i.  19;  Prof,  in  Get- 
tysb.  Sem.,  i.  34;  affection  for 
C.  P.  K. ;  urges  call  to  N.  Y., 
i.  150;  "one  of  our  noblest 
men,"  i.  260;  conservatives  to 
keep  quiet,  i.  349 ;  Pacific 
Overture ;  a  compromise ; 
"  patching  up  a  hollow  peace," 
i.  363,  364;  letter  to  C.  P.  K., 
the  105  Theses,  ii.  242-243 ; 
other  mention,  i.  204. 

Schmucker ;  Rev.  Beale  M.,  C.  P. 
K.  in  Baltimore  (Memorial), 
i.  61;  in  Winchester,  (Mem.) 
i.  142;  C.  P.  K.'s  relation  to 
Confessions  (Mem.)  i.  160; 
liturgical  studies,  i.  188;  cor- 
respondence with  C.  P.  K. 
(1848-1852)  i.  172;  182-191; 
succeeds  C.  P.  K.  in  Martins- 
burg,  i.  182 ;  charge  to  first 
Faculty,  Phila.  Sem.,  ii.  142; 
del.  to  Gen.  Synod,  Fort 
Wayne,  ii.  157;  liturgical  posi- 
tion opposed  to  C.  P.  K.,  ii. 
191  ;  differs  from  him  on  the 
Pastorate  and  Diaconate,  ii. 
192;  opposes  a  vote  on  105 
Theses,  ii.  247 ;  the  Loci  Com- 
munes, ii.  321  ;  conducts  ser- 
vice at  grave  of  C.  P.  K.,  ii. 


438 


INDEX. 


Schmucker ;  Rev.  Beale  M. ;  Con- 
tinued: 
399;  prepares  Memorial 
(quoted  as  above)  and  List 
of  C.  P.  K.'s  Publications  for 
Ministerium,  ii.  401. 

Rev.  J.  G.,  a  founder  of  Gen. 

Synod,  i.  343. 

Rev.    Peter,    a    founder    of 

Gen.   Synod,  i.  343. 

Rev.  S.  S.,  a  founder  of  Gen. 

Synod,  i.  343 ;  leader  of  New 
Iheology,  i.  19;  332;  Prof, 
in  Seminary,  i.  34 ;  pleased 
with  "Abstract ;"  more  sym- 
bolical than  Dr.  Baugher,  i. 
114;  Popular  Theology,  i. 
116;  on  Lord's  Supper,  i.  192, 
193 ;  very  vulnerable,  i.  204 ; 
attacks  Augsb.  Conf.,  i.  302 ; 
earlier  position,  i.  336,  ay ; 
doctrinal  position  of  Gen. 
Synod  (1855)  i.  2Z7-2>Z^;  Vo- 
cation of  Amer.  Luth. 
Church,  i.  339;  author  of  Def. 
Platform ;  acknowledged  ten 
years  later,  i.  357 ;  Summary 
of  Doctrine,  i.  341 ;  Historical 
Meditations  and  Notes,  quot- 
ed, i.  342 ;  support  of  Dr. 
Kurtz,  i.  344;  grievances 
against  C.  Ph.  K.,  i.  374;  de- 
fends Platform,  i.  362  ;  375  ; 
charge  of  unsound  teaching,  i. 
410;  defended  by  C.  P.  K.,  i. 
411;  the  Spiritual  Worship  of 
God,  sermon  against  the  gown, 
ii.  14 ;  reviewed  by  C.  P.  K., 
ii.  18,  19;  American  Recension 
of  Augsb.  Conf.,  ii.  119;  re- 
signs in  Gettysb.,  ii.  139 ;  the 
Coming  Theological  Conflict, 
edit,  in  Observer,  ii.  152;  on 
Comm.  of  West  Penna. 
Synod,  ii.  168. 
Schneeweiss;  Simon,  i.  i6r. 
Schober ;  Rev.  Gottlieb,  a  Mo- 
ravian, Seer,  of  N.  Car. 
Synod,  i.  324;  a  founder  of 
Gen.  Synod,  i.  343. 


Schrack ;  Christian,  of  St.  Mat- 
thew's, Phila.,  i.  34. 

Schweigert ;  Rev.  M.,  ii.  177. 

Science  and  Religion  have  one 
aim,  ii.  278. 

Scissors  and  paste-pot,  ii.  343. 

Seals  designed  by  C.  P.  K. ; 
Synod  of  Va.,  i.  155;  General 
Council,  ii.  246. 

Seiss ;  Rev.  Joseph  A.,  pastor  in 
Shepherdstown,  i.  138 ;  letter 
from,  and  reply,  (Popular 
Amusements)  i.  148,  149; 
friendship  with  C.  P.  K.,  i. 
149 ;  correspondence  with, 
1850-1852,  i.  153;  172;  192- 
»I97;  "Reflections,"  i.  196; 
258;  dedicated  to  C.  P.  K.,  i. 
197;  pastor  in  Baltimore,  i. 
197;  letters  to:  i.  258  (Santa 
Cruz)  ;  272,  (anxious  bench)  ; 
installation  of  C.  P.  K.,  St. 
Mark's,  ii.  i ;  success  in  St. 
John's,  ii.  2;  co-editor  Luth. 
and  Home  Journal,  ii.  29; 
first  connection  with  L.  &  M., 
ii.  51 ;  on  ed.  comm.  of  L.  & 
M.,  ii.  58 ;  tour  in  Holy  Land ; 
reception ;  C.  P.  K.'s  greeting, 
ii.  180;  del.  Gen.  Synod,  Fort 
Wayne,  ii.  157;  pastor  of 
Holy  Communion,  ii.  180 ; 
Galesb.  Rule  "  neither  in 
Scripture  nor  Confessions,"  ii. 
207 ;  a  "  crude  utterance,"  ii. 
208;  corr.  with  C.  P.  K.,  con- 
cerning Rule,  ii.  206-209;  not 
pleased  with  C.  P.  K.'s  arti- 
cles; invites  free  discussion  of 
Rule  in  L.  &  M..  ii.  211 ;  the 
invitation  accepted ;  samples  of 
"  more  thorough  examination 
and  closeness  of  thinking,"  ii. 
214;  the  Rule  "a  myth,  a 
fable,"  ii.  215;  action  of  con- 
gregations threatened,  ii.  217; 
his  pastoral  usage  in  conflict 
with  the  radical  position,  ii. 
218;  cf.  ii.  214;  defended  by 
C.  P.  K.  against  Dr.  Ruperti, 
ii.   218;    Chairman  of  Comm. 


INDEX. 


439 


Sciss;  Rev.  Joseph  A.;  Continued: 
on  Minnesota  Question,  ii. 
202 ;  explains  his  indifference 
to  Cons.  Reformation,  ii.  313; 
publishes  24  Propositions  on 
the  Galesburg  Declaration; 
claims  to  represent  real  posi- 
tion of  G.  C,  as  over  against 
its  official  utterances,  ii.  222 ; 
"  ill  at  harmony  with  himself," 
ii.  227 :  letter  to  C.  P.  K. 
deprecating  their  alienation,  ii. 
237-238;  cordial  response,  ii. 
239;  leads  opposition  to  105 
Theses,  ii.  244;  strained  rela- 
tions between  him  and  C.  P. 
K. ;  a  frank  letter  from  C.  P. 
K.,  ii.  248;  cf.  i.  259;  his  ap- 
peal rejected,  ii.  249;  as  Presi- 
dent of  Sem.  Board,  and  of 
Penna.  Ministerium  J.  A.  S. 
offers  English  Prayer  at 
funeral  of  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  398. 
Selden ;  Dr.,  instructs  C.  Ph.  K.  in 

medicine,  i.  7. 
Seminary ;  Theological,  of  Penna. 
Synod,  desired  by  Muehlen- 
berg;  work  begun  by  Dr. 
Demme  (1846);  urged  by 
German  pastors,  ii.  139;  by 
Rev.  C.  W.  Schaeffer  in  Presi- 
dent's report  ( 1864)  ;  unani- 
mous resolution  of  Minis- 
terium, ii.  140 ;  pressing  need 
of,  ii.  148 ;  condemned  as 
revolutionary  (Gen.  Synod) 
ii.  152;  Dr.  S.  S.  S.'s  view  of 
crisis,  ii.  153;  C.  Ph.  K.'s 
judgment,  ii.  154;  election  of 
professors ;  endowment  and 
building  fund,  ii.  141  ;  first 
Faculty  installed ;  charge  by 
B.  M.  S.,  ii.  142;  reply  by  C. 
P.  K,  ii.  143;  growth  and  re- 
moval to  Mt.  Airy,  ii.  141, 
142;  efforts  of  C.  P.  K.  for 
its  library,  ii.  146;  the  Krauth 
Memorial  Library,  ii.  298. 
Sermons;  making  (C.  Ph.  K.)  i. 
88;  trial  sermons,  i.  293. 


"  Sharp  letters,"  quoted  from  edit. 

L.  &  .1/.,  ii.  50,  51. 
Shields ;    Professor,  of  Princeton, 

ii.  319. 
Shryock ;  J.  K.,  last  interview  with 
C.  P.  K.,  ii.,  394;  pall  bearer, 

ii-  399- 
Silence  on  the  truth,  ii.  56. 
Smith ;     Rev.     D.     C,    agent     for 

Penna.    College,   i.   80. 

Rev.     Joseph     Few,     letters 

from,  i.  81  ;  141  ;  otherwise 
mentioned,  i.  80,  and  note; 
102;    197;   200. 

Dr.  Wm.,  Provost  of  College 

of  Philadelphia,  ii.  250;  polit- 
ical views  ;  charter  of  College 
abrogated ;  reconstructed  as 
University  of  Penna.,  ii.  251  ; 
charter  restored  (1789);  col- 
lege merged  in  University 
(1791)  ii.  251-252;  see  Uni- 
versity. 

"  Snaky  doves,  dove-like  ser- 
pents," ii.  136. 

Societies ;  Bible,  etc.,  not  most 
important  work  of  Church,  i. 
260. 

Spaeth;  Rev.  Adolph,  (son-in- 
law)  i.  78;  debate  on  the 
Sabbath,  ii.  124;  consecration 
of  St.  Stephen's,  ii.  181 ; 
Galesb.  Rule,  ii.  237;  succeeds 
C.  P.  K.  as  Pres.  of  G.  C. ; 
letter  to,  ii.  223 ;  moves  in 
Synod  to  request  C.  P.  K.  to 
write  Luther  Biography,  ii. 
362  ; .  letters  to,  ii.  364 ;  370 ; 
374;  marriage,  ii.  367. 

Charles  Friedrich,  (grand- 
son)  ii.  383. 

Harriett  R.,  see  Krauth. 

Spielmann ;   Rev.   C,  letter  to,   ii. 

236. 
Sprecher ;  Rev.  S.,  in  college  de- 
bate, i.  29;  Pres.  Wittenberg 
College,  i.  30;  influence  over 
S.  S.  S.,  i.  346;  his  views 
quoted,  i.  346-347 ;  distrust  of 
Symbolists,  i.  352-353;  open- 
ing sermon  at  York ;   elected 


440 


INDEX. 


Sprecher;  Rev.  S. ;  Continued: 
President,  ii.  128;  letter  to  S. 
S.  S.  on  the  "  case  "  of  Penna. 
Synod,  ii.  155;  Fort  Wayne 
Convention,  (Gen.  Synod)  ii. 
157,  ff. ;  a  preconcerted  pro- 
gramme, ii.  155;  156;  how 
carried  out,  ii.  159,  160. 

S.  S.  S.— Dr.  S.  S.  Schmucker. 

St.  James'  Church,  ii.   12;   13. 

St.  Johannis  Church;  C.  P..  K.'s 
love  for  its  services;  minister- 
ing at  its  altar,  ii.  382;  his 
funeral ;  the  choir,  ii.  398. 

St.  John's,  Philadelphia,  i.  152; 
290 ;  ii.  2 ;  endows  chair  in 
Seminary,  ii.  141 ;  first  Faculty 
installed  in,  ii.  142;  C.  P.  K.'s 
pastoral  work  in,  ii.  180,  181  ; 
memorializes  Synod  against 
Galesb.  Rule,  ii.  217. 

St.  Mark's  congregation ;  organ- 
ized 1850;  original  constitu- 
tion, ii.  I ;  mixed  material  in, 
ii.  2 ;  gown  controversy,  ii. 
3,  ff. ;  peculiar  character  of,  ii. 
10;  secession  from,  ii.  12; 
unites  with  Penna.  Synod,  ii. 
24;  denounced  by  Observer, 
ii.  25 ;  memorializes  Synod 
against  Galesb.  Rule,  ii.  217. 

St.  Matthew's,  Phila.,  C.  Ph.  K. 
first  pastor,  i.  9 ;  C.  P.  K.  in 
the  Sunday  School,  i.  27,  28. 

St.  Peter's;  C.  P.  K.  pastor  of, 
ii.   180. 

St.  Stephen's,  West  Philadelphia ; 
C.  P.  K.  pastor  of ;  Jubilee 
Service  used  in,  ii.  181 ;  two 
Christmas  hymns  written  for, 
ii.  182;  lecture  for  benefit  of, 

ii.  377- 
St.  Thomas,  West  Indies ;  C.  P. 
K.  pastor  in  Dutch  Reformed 
Church,  i.  216;  Danish  Luth. 
Church  in,  i.  224 ;  240 ;  trop- 
ical housekeeping,  i.  217;  222; 
234 ;  256 ;  society,  i.  239 ;  250 ; 
education  in,  i.  241 ;  yellow 
fever,  i.  251;  ii.  235;  letters 
from,  i.  221-252. 


Staake;  W.  H.,  Treasurer  of  G. 
C. ;  with  C.  P.  K.  prepares 
seal  of  G.  C,  ii.  246;  other 
mention,  ii.  363. 

Staunton,  Va. ;  C.  P.  K.'s  child- 
hood there,  i.  27 ;  letters  from, 
i.  209,  ff. ;  Asylum  for  Deaf, 
Dumb  and   Blind,  i.  210-212. 

Stille;  Dr.  Charles  J.,  Provost  of 
University  of  Penna.,  (1868)  ; 
C.  P.  K.'s  intimacy  with,  ii. 
252 ;  letter  to,  on  College  Dis- 
cipline, ii.  253 ;  resigns  Pro- 
vostship,  (1880),  ii.  255;  C.  P. 
K.'s  tribute  to,  ii.  252. 

Stoever;  Prof.  M.  L.,  biographi- 
cal sketch  of  C.  Ph.  K.,  i.  6; 
Pacific   Overture,   i.   362. 

Stonebreaker ;  Mrs.  of  Baltimore, 
i.  77- 

Stork ;  Rev.  T.,  founder  of  St. 
Mark's,  i.  291;  296;  ii.  10; 
moves  publ.  of  Dr.  Mann's 
remarks  against  Def.  Plat- 
form, i.  361 ;  implores  C.  P. 
K.  to  review  Amer.  Luth. 
Vindicated,  i.  375 ;  editor  of 
Observer,  ii.  31 ;  desired  edi- 
torship of  L.  &  M.,  ii.    39. 

Strauss ;  David  Friedrich,  review- 
ed by  Ulrici,  ii.  271;  277;  In- 
troduction to  C.  P.  K.'s  transl. 
of  Ulrici,  ii.  278;  letters  to  C. 
.     P.  K.,  ii.  281. 

Streit ;  Rev.  Christian,  first  pastor 
in  Winchester,  i.  265  ;  270-271 ; 
his  granddaughter  C.  P.  K.'s 
second  wife;  inscription  for 
his  monument,  i.  270. 

Stuckenberg;  Rev.  J.  H.  W.,  or- 
ganizes congr.  in  opposition 
to  First  Engl,  church,  Pittsb., 
ii.  176;  witness  for  Gen. 
Synod  in  Hebron  case,  ii. 
177. 

Stuart ;  Prof.  Moses,  on  Lord's 
Supper,  quoted,  i.  115;  re- 
viewed by  C.  P.  K.,  i.  117. 

Substantial  Correctness  defined, 
(C.  P.  K.)  i.  395.  ff. 


JXDEX. 


441 


Sunday  School  Songs,  reviewed, 
ii-  355.  ff- ;  "  nothing  worse 
than  their  style,  except  their 
matter."    ii.    356. 

Swain ;  Col.  T.  G.,  letter  to  C.  Ph. 
K.  i.  3- 

Swartz ;  Rev.  Joel,  article  in  Ob- 
scri'er,  on  Cons.  Reformation  ; 
letter  from  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  313. 

Swedish  Augustana  Synod;  action 
on  mixed  communion,  ii.  204- 
205;  221;  approved  by  G.  C, 
ii.  205. 

Symbolical  Books ;  their  value  to 
the  student.  (C.  Ph.  K.)  i.  21- 
23;  Henkel's  transl.  of,  i.  174; 
194;  206. 

Symbolism  ;  "  extinguishing  vital 
godliness "  in  Ev.  Review,  i. 
208;  in  the  Gen.  Synod, 
(1829),  i.  334-335;  vs.  Apos- 
tolic liberty,  (S.  S.  S.)  i.  342; 
Symbolism  and  Amer.  Luth- 
eranism,  i.  316,  ff. 

Synod ;  General,  see  General 
Synod. 

Synodical  Conference ;  spirit  of, 
ii.  219;  Predestination,  ii.  326. 

Synods;   see   specific   name. 


Taffy-pulling;  linguistic,  i.  224. 

Taylor :   Jeremy,   ii.   346. 

Mrs.  Mary,  (aunt)  i.  2;  3. 

Oscar,  (cousin)  i.  3. 

Temperance  Jewels ;  "  of  the 
purest   water,"  ii.   356. 

Tennessee ;  Synod  of,  opposed  to 
Gen.  Synod,  i.  324 ;  329 ;  again 
invited  to  join  it,  i.  350. 

Texas ;  Synod  of,  received  into 
Gen.   Synod,  1853,  i.  352. 

Thanksgiving  Discourses ;  two,  i. 
299. 

Tholuck ;  Commentary  on  John,  i. 
303;  letter  to  C  P.  K.,  i.  304. 

Thompson ;  Rev.  Robert  Ellis, 
Baccalaureate  Sermon,  1883, 
quoted,  i.  156;  215;  ii.  397- 
398;  address  at  dedication  of 
Krauth      Memorial      Library, 


quoted,  ii.  270;  review  of 
Bayne's  Luther ;  "  Luther  still 
waits  for  his  English  bio- 
grapher,"   ii.    362. 

Thueringia,  ii.  379-381. 

Tiedeman ;  Rev.,  Lutheran  pastor 
in  St.  Thomas,  i.  224;  240. 

Tilton ;  Mrs.  i.  3. 

Transfiguration;  the,  {Ev.  Re- 
view)   i.    158;  202. 

Translation  hardest  literary  labor, 
i.    192 ;    257. 

in    the    highest    sense  .... 

thought  for  thought,  power 
for  power,  ii.  336. 

Trial  sermons  condemned,  i.  293. 

Tribute;  A,  (poem)  i.  262. 

and  conscience,  ii.  68. 

Trinity ;  the,  doctrine  discussed 
with  C.  Ph.  K.,  i.  97-99. 

"  Trojan  horses  .  .  .  hollownesses 
stuflfed  with  mischiefs,"  ii. 
291. 

"  Truth  must  proscribe  or  be  pro- 
scribed," ii.    100. 

Two  Pageants ;  tribute  to  Lin- 
coln, quoted,  ii.  yji- 

Ulrici  ;  Dr.  Herman,  review  of 
Strauss ;  transl.  by  C.  P.  K., 
ii.  271 ;  his  Introduction  quot- 
ed, ii.  278;  letter  to  C.  P.  K., 
ii.  281. 

LTnion  of  Lutheran  and  Reform- 
ed Churches  desired,  i.  323 ; 
325;  22,2. 

the,   from  edit.   L.   &  M.,  ii. 

,   .69. 

Lnity  of  the  Church;  quoted  from 
edit.  L.  &  M.,  ii.  56;  unity, 
how  brought  about,  ii.  80 ; 
agreement  in  fundamentals 
necessary  to  true  unity,  ii. 
115;  to  be  fostered  by  new 
Seminary,  ii.  150-151 ;  unity  of 
the  whole  forwarded  by  unity 
among  ourselves,  i.  408;  ii. 
314;   cf.   i.  420. 

Unity,  oneness  in  faith,  from  ad- 
dress before  Pittsb.  Synod,  ii. 
162-163. 


442 


INDEX. 


University  of  Pennsylvania ;  older 
universities,  ii.  250,  note;  its 
forerunners  in  Philadelphia ; 
Franklin's  connection  with,  ii. 
250 ;  Lutheran  representation 
required  on  its  Board,  ii.  251  ; 
C.  P.  K.'s  positions  in ;  ad- 
ministration of  Dr.  Charles  J. 
Stille,  ii.  252;  relations  of 
Trustees  and  Faculty  to  college 
discipline ;  letter  from  C.  P. 
K.,  ii.  253;  Dr.  Stille  resigns; 
C.  P.  K.  acting  Provost ; 
Trustees  petitioned  to  elect 
him  Provost;  petition  reject- 
ed, ii.  255 ;  plan  to  re-organize 
University;  many  details  of 
Provost's  work  given  to  Vice- 
Provost,  ii.  255-256;  C.  P.  K.'s 
letter  to  Mr.  Fraley,  ii.  256; 
the  burden  laid  upon  him  as 
Vice- Provost,  ii.  257;  383; 
alarm  over  his  condition,  ii. 
395 ;  representation  of  Uni- 
versity at  his  funeral,  ii.  398. 


Valentine;    Rev.    Milton,   supply 

in    Winchester,   i.    214;    letter 

to,  i.  225;  visited  by  C.  P.  K., 

i.  273 ;  signs  Pacific  Overture, 

i.  362. 
"  Velvet  cuticles  "  and  critics,  from 

edit.  L.  &  M.,  ii.  91. 
Virginia  ;  people  of,  i.  146 ;  address 

in  Salem  quoted,  ii.  60. 
Synod    of,    organized    1829 ; 

relations    to    Gen.    Synod,    i. 

153;  154;  C.  P.  K.  and  B.  M. 

S.   Comm.  on  Liturgy,  i.   154; 

seal  designed  by  C.    P.   K.,   i. 

155- 
Visible  Church ;  a,  ii.  217. 


Walther;  Rev.  Chr.  F.  W.,  Latin 
letter  from,  i.  300;  Memorial 
of  C.  P.  K.  quoted,  ii.  114; 
defends  Penna.  Synod  against 
misrepresentation,  ii.  162 ; 
fears    hierarchical    tendencies 


in  C.  P.  K.,  ii.  171;  Teaching 
and  Ruling  Elders,  ii.  193; 
Predestination  Controversy, 
ii.   327. 

Welden;  Rev.  C.  F.,  desires  new 
Seminary,   ii.    139. 

Wenzel ;  Rev.  G.  A.,  ii.  177. 

West  Indies;  letters  from,  i.  220- 
260;  a  voyage  to,  in  1852,  i. 
222,  223 ;  races  of  men,  i.  236 ; 
poverty  in,  i.  218,  219. 

West  Pennsylvania ;  Synod  of, 
censures  Observer,  ii.  32;  ad- 
dress to  the  churches  on  "  the 
secession  of  the  Penna. 
Synod;"  endorsed  by  East 
Penna.   Synod,  ii.    168. 

Weyman;  George,  of  Pittsburgh, 
i.   271. 

Miss  Harriet,  ii.  362. 

What  shall  we  do  with  them? 
(Southern  Synods)  edit.  L. 
S-  M.,  ii.  75. 

Where  do  we  stand?  Edit.  L.  &■ 
M.,  ii.  35. 

"  Whispering  on  the  fingers,"  i. 
211. 

White ;   Bishop,  i.  322. 

Willard;  Rev.  P.,  ordained  with 
C.  P.  K.,  i.  no. 

Wilson;  Rev.  Professor,  of  Pitts- 
burgh,   i.    288. 

Winchester,  Va. ;  C.  P.  K.  called 
to,  i.  141  ;  happiest  period  of 
his  life,  i.  142;  277;  287;  his 
pastorate  in,  i.  144;  his  love 
for,  i.  152;  229;  early  history 
of  its  church,  i.  265 ;  social 
conditions  in,  i.  143 ;  285 ; 
meeting  of  Gen.  Synod  in,  i. 
308;  352;  revival  in,  i.  310. 

Winter;  Rev.  John,  Pres.  Mary- 
land  Synod,  i.    no. 

Wisconsin ;  Synod  of,  repr.  in 
Reading  Convention,  ii.  174; 
withdraws  from  G.  C,  after 
Pittsb.  declaration,  ii.  202. 

"  Wishing  time  "  in  the  Church,  ii. 
43- 


INDEX. 


443 


Wit;  ii.  346;  created  to  keep 
down  nonsense,  ii.  91  ;  i.  423. 

Wolf;  Rev.  E.  J.,  "Lutherans  in 
America,"   i.    319. 

Wyneken;  Rev.  Fr.,  Missouri 
Synod,  urges  C.  P.  K.  to 
translate  Chemnitz'  Examcn 
Concilii  Tridentini,  ii.  321  ;  a 
staunch  Lutheran,  i.  ^a. 


ZiON ;  the  Peace  of,  Synodical 
Sermon,    S.    S.    S.,   quoted,   i. 

Zion's  congregation,  Philadelphia ; 
gift  to  Seminarv,  ii.   141. 

Zwingli;  and  Rome,  i.  124;  charg- 
ed with  Pelagianism,  i.  133 ; 
and  Oecolampadius,  i.  134; 
and  Wittenberg,  ii.  95. 


m 


DATE  DUE 

1  r,  i'^^  '•  ~" 

ftt 

J/l*«P"K 

34 

===~ 

GAYLORD 

PRINTED  IN  U.S.A. 

